complete Sithtrooper Cuirass & Gorget (Chest/Back Armor/Collar) - Draft CRL Development Discussion

[nanotek[CMD-DWM]]

Ready to gain agreement

Cuirass & Gorget (Chest/Back Armor)

• Finished in a high gloss deep red that matches the colors of the entire costume
• Cuirass is comprised of the Chest and back, with a Gorget forming the neck opening

Cuirass Back

• The back has an O II (02) shape is made up of recessed II and the O is a recessed circular line divided almost in half by an intersecting horizontal line
  • The bottom part of the circle is recessed, is black and is slightly smaller in appearance than the top half
  • There is a small black vertical oblong recess in the top half to the left side
• The back has two trapezoidal "buckles" at the top back of the shoulders where it connects to the chest shoulder trapezoidal buckle
• The back has a recessed trapezoidal shape at the bottom of the left shoulder buckle that has more than13 recessed vertical lines
  • The bottom of the this shape is the same length as the top half of the lower trapezoidal section.
  • The angle of the bottom matches the angle at the top of the bottom trapezoid.
  • The recessed/raised lines do not extend all the way to the bottom
  • The inside line of the trapezoid matches the angle of the buckle
• On the back there is a raised trapezoidal section that starts at the base of the back and extends towards the left shoulder.
  • There is a small recessed rectangle directly about the top of the trapezoid and is black. 
  • The top of the Trapezoid is the same width as the bottom of the recessed trapezoid under the top left shoulder.
  • The angle of the top of the this trapezoid is parallel to the bottom of the recessed trapezoid at the base of the left buckle.
  • The raised section gets higher towards the top and arches out slightly from the wearer’s back.

 

Cuirass Chest

• 3 vertical oblong recesses near the collar on each side of the chest near the centre opening
• The chest extends over the shoulder towards the back forming the shoulder straps which have an attached trapezoidal buckle that appears to connect to the trapezoidal buckles on the upper back armour.
• There are recessed lines extending diagonally out from the back collar to the shoulder, these lines intersect a few recessed lines deep with the vertical horizontal lines on the front.
• Raised smooth/flat section at front extends around the under arm of the wearer towards back. Starts as rectangular and tapers to match shoulder/arm hole
  • There are two raised panels on the lower section of the chest, each extends under the arms towards and forms the lowest part of the sides. Each panel has the appearance of a separate piece and there is a recess that runs around the outside edge
  • Left lower panel has one recessed diagonal channel
  • Right lower panel has a small rectangular box/raised area with at least 12 evenly spaced, vertical and slightly angled recessed lines, the bottom of the box/raised area extends slightly outwards from the wearer. There is a clip & buckle greeblie separated by a ratchet strap greeblie in a recessed cavity just above the box (please refer to the diagram)
• There are a number of vertically diagonal and evenly spaced recessed lines that start at the top of the rectangular part of the front boxes, and extend towards the armhole.
• There are a number of recessed diagonal lines under the arms that extend from the armhole towards the front, intersecting with the curve of the raised box section.
• There are a number of vertically diagonal, evenly spaced recessed lines that start approximately halfway under the armhole and extend back to and underlap the Cuirass back. The recessed lines match the diagonal shape of the back armour.
• Both chest sides connect to the lower back armour
• The centre section of the chest has the appearance of being a separate piece that has rectangular and horizontal recesses in lower section, vertical recesses in upper section and a small rectangular recess near the top

 

Gorget (Collar) - One piece that goes under the cuirass to form the neckline of the armour

•  
• Finished in a high gloss deep red that matches the colors of the entire costume
• Sits flat around the neckline
• Sits under the cuirass (or chest/back) and fits closely to the Neck Seal and appears to be part of the cuirass
• If there is a seam, it is as unnoticeable as possible and shall be securely closed with no visible overlaps or gap present
• There are 3 visible steps forming rings around the neckline, ascending from the neckline to the cuirass or chest/back. The third ring from the neckline and is closest to the armour has the following details:
  • 15-17 raised sections that start and end at the shoulders, one centre raised section at the centre front that matches the width of the opening of lower front part of the cuirass opening, 7 smaller and evenly spaced raised sections that extend towards the shoulder 
  • Segments 1-5 (from the centre section) and 7 are roughly 25mm wide
  • Segment 6 (from the centre)  is roughly 25mm wide

 

OPTIONAL (Level 2)

• The gorget must be a separate piece with no seam constructed of a flexible rubber like material
• Chest shoulder buckle is a separate piece
• Ratchet strap greeblie has 5 visible teeth
• Small rectangular box on the right chest has 13 recessed vertical lines
• Trapezoidal recess on the back under the left buckle has 15 recessed lines
• There are 8 recessed lines extending diagonally out from the back collar to the shoulder, these lines intersect 6 recessed lines deep with the vertical horizontal lines on the front.
• On the front chest there are 27 vertically diagonal and evenly spaced recessed lines that start at the top of the rectangular part of the front boxes, and extend towards the armhole.
• There are 12 recessed diagonal lines under the arms that extend from the armhole towards the front, intersecting with the curve of the raised box section.
• The centre section of the chest has the appearance of being a separate piece that has 12 rectangular and horizontal recesses in lower section, 5 vertical recesses in upper section and a small rectangular recess near the top

 

 

[JoeShoe[TX]]

if its any help, this is the back of my jim kit fully sealed up.  The seam is definitely there, but only really visible if you're looking for it.  Its definitely a piece that would not fit around my head if it didnt have an opening.  

https://imgur.com/a/Y63Iek9

edit: (seems im at my attachment quota?  Linked it to an imgur post instead)

[RAIDER[COTG]]

Thanks @JoeShoe

For Imgur...if you copy the bbcode in here it will display the image right in here.  Heading out...but will take a look later.  Thanks again!

[nanotek[CMD-DWM]]

5 hours ago, JoeShoe said:

if its any help, this is the back of my jim kit fully sealed up.  The seam is definitely there, but only really visible if you're looking for it.  Its definitely a piece that would not fit around my head if it didnt have an opening.  

https://imgur.com/a/Y63Iek9

edit: (seems im at my attachment quota?  Linked it to an imgur post instead)

Thanks @JoeShoe, I have edited your post to show the image. @Raider

There's a lot of other stuff going on here but I'll focus on the join in the collar at the back. First of all, my preference is screen accuracy above all else, so this is my angle when it comes to the CRL.

We have a lot of reference material that shows that there is no join in the collar, that it is one piece of flexible PU rubber, however if it is absolutely impossible to achieve this then we will have to look at relaxing the CRL for entry level approval (L1 vs L2). Considering I have seen that there are some people who have moulded the collar in PU rubber (even though inaccurate when referenced) it is still possible. I am keen to hear from these people and how it went!

SecondIy I feel that if we relax the CRL to accomodate certain makers we are setting precedents for other makers to argue how their costume should also be considered to relax the standards. The default should be the CRL influences the makers, not vice versa.

All options will be considered at the end of the day, but I don't feel like this one piece is impossible to achieve.

[JoeShoe[TX]]

my concern with using rubber/silicone is color matching.  its nigh impossible to get a finish that'll stay on flexible materials like that, especially with such a high friction location.  Whatever color you cast in, is ideally what it'll remain, and so while we havent nailed down a specific code of red to use, i can imagine slight variations of red depending on global product availability becoming an issue for slightly off color gorgets. 

[gmrhodes13[501st]]

My take, (although a little biased ) I get the screen accuracy argument as I've got just a few higher level costumes but I personally don't think having a split would be too much of an issue for base acceptance, especially on the rear, I would gather quite a few GML's wouldn't even notice it and I'd bet a few will slip through.

I may still move the split to on top of the shoulder BUT it would still be a noticeable split so really no point. I did speak to Jim about this some time ago but he believed having it on the rear really wouldn't be noticed by the public and wasn't too concerned.

I guess the other issue would be finding a flexible section that firstly would match the color of the armor (I won't be repainting the whole kit just to match a neck section), then the second issue would be find a material that could be stretched over the head but still close around the neck nicely.

I know some detachments can be lenient depending on armor supplies and what they can produce, for example FISD allows TFA cod sections for TLJ base approval as there weren't enough makers supplying them at the time the CRL was made, a correct TLJ cod is a requirement for L2. Now I did create a TLJ cod and did get L2 and L3 approval so it's not unachievable. Things may be done differently here so all good, each detachment is different.

At the end of the day if a seam is not allowable then I'm not going to get all bent out of shape, I guess I'll just continue to troop in an unapproved costume and won't get a TX on my legion profile ?

[nanotek[CMD-DWM]]

I agree, we have to weigh up all the options and ensure that we respect the costume as best as we can whilst making the build achievable

[RAIDER[COTG]]

I agree with both points by @gmrhodes13 and @nanotek (which helps none at all lol)...Level 1 is “the look” by and large achieved.  Level 2 is it accurate to the reference.

Is it a detail that derails the look of a Sith Trooper?  Its a question with a subjective answer that ultimately we as a community need to decide upon.  That said, I highly agree with Mark that accommodating vendors cant be a driving factor.

[JoeShoe[TX]]

Think that good arguments have been made for both sides.  I suppose the question now is how we move forward with a decision?  For me, I think the seamless, flexible material requirement should be L2.  The real costume, being a cast production piece, was designed for limited wear and usage, is designed to fit a very specific body type and proportions, and worn for a few weeks of shooting - no considerations for long term wear and tear or individuals outside of their casting requirements were made.  

To make this piece of the costume so restrictive at L1 is going to make it very hard to approach this costume for all but the most dedicated or 'ideal' troopers.  

just my 2 cents.  

[Skablaze]

On 8/1/2019 at 11:41 PM, nanotek said:

• Gorget (Collar) - One piece that goes under the cuirass to form the neckline of the armor
  • 3 rings that are steps
  • No visible seam
  • 15 raised sections on the step closest to the armor that start and end at the shoulders
    • One centre raised section that matches the width of the opening of lower part of the cuirass opening at the front
    • 7 smaller and evenly spaced raised sections that extend towards the shoulder 
    •  

I only count 6 of them on the reference pictures. Can someone put the light on that ? Is is based on the Stage troopers, statues or the Hot Toys action figure ? Thanks

[JoeShoe[TX]]

2 hours ago, Skablaze said:

I only count 6 of them on the reference pictures. Can someone put the light on that ? Is is based on the Stage troopers, statues or the Hot Toys action figure ? Thanks

its 7. They are all not the same size - the 6th from the front is a larger raised section that is a little smaller than shoulder width. 

[JoeShoe[TX]]

I'd like to keep the momentum going on this CRL.  Can we get some input so far as how a decision will be made regarding seam/seamless gorget?

[RAIDER[COTG]]

On 1/10/2020 at 11:54 AM, JoeShoe said:

Think that good arguments have been made for both sides.  I suppose the question now is how we move forward with a decision?  For me, I think the seamless, flexible material requirement should be L2.  The real costume, being a cast production piece, was designed for limited wear and usage, is designed to fit a very specific body type and proportions, and worn for a few weeks of shooting - no considerations for long term wear and tear or individuals outside of their casting requirements were made.  

To make this piece of the costume so restrictive at L1 is going to make it very hard to approach this costume for all but the most dedicated or 'ideal' troopers.  

just my 2 cents.  

To me thats reasonable.

[Blackwatch[CMD-DCA]]

JoeShoe brings up the point about the ideal trooper and most of us are not that.  As a Det, the feeling that we should drive the armorors  is correct, our starndards  set the precedent for their product. If they CHOOSE to alter their exiting products they will, some will not. 

To me the gap in back, if properly closed up to where only a closed up seam is somewhat visible, should be allowed for L1 basic approval. 

The silicon bridge is one I have struggled with (color / sheen matching on latex straps).   So for me it comes down to 

A:  Is the join between the split parts a game killer for L2?   

B: Is relocating the join/split to the shoulder a greater evil than the gap at the back?  

C :  Can a top cover piece be manufactured to go over the top of the original piece with its split, to hide it? This would be held on with magnets or Velcro, etc. 

 

 

[JoeShoe[TX]]

5 hours ago, Blackwatch said:

JoeShoe brings up the point about the ideal trooper and most of us are not that.  As a Det, the feeling that we should drive the armorors  is correct, our starndards  set the precedent for their product. If they CHOOSE to alter their exiting products they will, some will not. 

To me the gap in back, if properly closed up to where only a closed up seam is somewhat visible, should be allowed for L1 basic approval. 

The silicon bridge is one I have struggled with (color / sheen matching on latex straps).   So for me it comes down to 

A:  Is the join between the split parts a game killer for L2?   

B: Is relocating the join/split to the shoulder a greater evil than the gap at the back?  

C :  Can a top cover piece be manufactured to go over the top of the original piece with its split, to hide it? This would be held on with magnets or Velcro, etc. 

 

 

a) I believe it would be.  If we're taking L2 to be as accurate as we can possibly be, There should be a requirement for it to be the same material and build as the actual prop.  We know the methodology, and we know it can be done.  Whether it's ideal or not, isnt really what L2 asks for.  

b)The split at the shoulder is more likely to be visible/cause sagging problems from an imbalance.  Our troopers are mostly viewed from the front (Its always standard practice for me to place my back against a wall/another trooper while on patrol)

c)Introducing a cover strip/piece would be more noticeable.  Either it'll look raised (like the other parts of the gorget), or will just introduce another two 'seams' onto the profile of the gorget. 

[Blackwatch[CMD-DCA]]

Then we are back to having a seam in all cases unless a silicon piece is used.  

 

 

[RAIDER[COTG]]

24 minutes ago, Blackwatch said:

Then we are back to having a seam in all cases unless a silicon piece is used.  

 

 

Correct.  Though I think we should be ok to make it seamless Level 2...with what material that is achieved with can be open-ended though its more than likely going to require that more flexible material.  That's my thought at least.

[nanotek[CMD-DWM]]

To be honest here, I not comfortable that this argument is stemming around one kit that was produced prior to the film. I am also not comfortable with the idea that because something might be difficult to achieve that we should ignore that and go the easy path.

My preference will be no line because it’s a prominent area and you will be filmed/photographed from behind at some point. Regardless of L1 or L2 the CRL photo will eventually show the L2 because people will achieve it.

However if we are going to allow a join it is my opinion that it cannot be overlapping or show a gap. It would need to be a very fine line that is barely noticeable. 
 

I would like to hear from other members who do not own this kit. 

[JoeShoe[TX]]

I put out a call for opinions and feedback on the facebook build group.  If there's an RPF build thread/group, It'd be helpful to have input from that side as well.  

[VadersWingman[501st]]

I have Jim’s kit. I plan on closing the back seam with Bondo  and sanding smooth before painting and moving the split to the shoulder. Being JRS XO and having written several CRL’s I do agree that a split on the back should not be a dealbreaker for level 1 approval. I am as diehard as they come and take great pride in building the most accurate costumes possible but I also think the most times, for a club that’s supposed to be fun and all inclusive, some folks take the accuracy points to a ridiculous height. Which is why levels are good. There should always be a basic level approval and a higher level for those that are accuracy fanatics (like myself) if they so choose to achieve it. Let’s build costumes and go out and do good and make people smile and not be overly concerned about a split on the collar that no one in the public will care about. 

[Chaos[CMD-DCA]]

Good day all.

I plan on getting a Sith kit when I am finally back from the sand box. I was also delaying the purchase due to the CRL not being completed. I think that there have been enough photos and references placed out there by now that most makers of the kits have fine tuned their products to at least meet a basic Level 1 approval. 

I have seen many comments about the back split and that it is not screen accurate etc, but there are many CRLs across the Legion that say one thing, but with the dawning of Blu Ray DVDs you can find many "screen used" armor sets that don't meet the CRL but yet ... there they are in crystal clear digital Blu Ray show and tell. An example is that damn neck seal. For the longest time the zipper or velcro had to be in the back for some GMLs to approve it even thought the CRLs never really said, and really the only requirement for Level 2/3 is that it must have 11 rings. I'm sorry but if I had a neck seal with 11 rings and it was a basic requirement for approval I'd wear a neck seal with 11 rings and with my "turtle neck" I'd be passed out from asphyxiation in 5 minutes. 

I guess the point I am trying to make is that in my honest opinion, we develop CRLs at a basic level to assist members who don't have access to certain materials etc, during their builds so that they can at least gain basic approval. So we must look at what the basic approval is. Is it that the armor and accessories, when viewed by the average bystander, match what they have seen on the screen for all of 2 minutes and that they are amazed to be standing next to a Sith Trooper? 

I really don't think that a split on the back of the Gorget, when properly aligned with each edge butted up against the other would be a distractor or even that noticeable. For one, the back of the helmet sits over the top of the viewed area.  If we are concerned about the seam looking odd and pointing out like the above photo, then there are ways to ensure that the seams and joint lay flat and even against each other.

I agree with many of you and in my opinion for Level 1 basic approval just say its "one piece, and if there is a split to accommodate the wearer's head, then the edges must be together along the entire seam and there is the appearance of a flat even surface.  Level 2 can say No visible seam, and Level 3 can say is made from a flexible rubber like material which matches the rest of the armor in color and sheen. 

That's more than 2 cents but I found some spare change in my sofa.

[Lee_C_77[TX]]

FWIW I have Jim’s kit. If the neck section is an issue with clearance, so be it. 
I tried unsuccessfully to make a similar item to stretch over your head from PolyTek PT flex liquid rubber. I had several attempts, spending around £150 plus countless hours attempting it. Whilst it would be achievable, I’m not spending any more money attempting it. 
I made a basic O shape, with a inside diameter of my neck plus maybe 20mm and about 6mm thick.  I couldn’t stretch it over my head without it tearing, and that was with it being fully cured. 
Also, whilst I’m waiting on confirmation of the proper paint code, matching the paint to the pigment dye of the rubber would be fairly tricky. Unless it’s a common pigment, it would be very problematic. 
I’m sure there are people who would have some success, but I think the outlay to manufacture these wouldn’t be worth it. Prop makers are only going to invest in production if they’re going to make money from it. I’m not sure there is the demand for a neck piece. 
But back to the item in question and I think someone else said that if you have to split it open to get your head in, then you have to split it open. 
Whether the split is in the rear or the side, if it’s abs or fibreglass it needs one. 
If we’re saying that rubber must be used for that part, then rubber should be used for the whole kit. 
Let’s not forget what we do and why we do it. 
I and my garrison are sticklers for accuracy, but we’re talking about a 2” seam at the back or side of the neck, making a costume none clearable. 

 

maybe level 1 - discreet join

level 2 - no join

level 3 - rubber
 

Anyways, to the guys doing the CRL and the guys who have put the hours in researching, thank you.

[RAIDER[COTG]]

Thank you for the input.  I'm leaning towards this build as well and have held off on making any purchasing moves.  Just as @Chaos I don't feel comfortable buying something until I know in clear black and white what conditions I need to meet for approval.

Anyways, here are a few thoughts I have personally:

1) It's a community discussion.  I'm glad to see (today) people leaving the FB arena to participate in the forums...it's a net positive and something that I wish would happen more often quite frankly.  Thanks for stopping in...please stay around!

2) I personally agree with the sentiment generally being shared...the seam needs to be minimized and lay flat if it exists.  To tier the requirement seems reasonable.   I can view this as an accommodation for wearers (not vendors) who might not fit ideal proportions or have larger heads etc.  Regarding the material...this can be tiered as well...though it was stated above that to achieve no seam whatsoever would more than likely mean the flex material would have to be used.  Both "no seam" and material could be rolled into Level 2...or we can develop Level 3 (which has never been done before at Spec Ops).

3) Everything is still a work in progress and everyone should approach all of this understanding that nothing has been set in stone yet.  @nanotek started discussion threads on each piece back in August with @gmrhodes13 assistance in compiling reference pictures.  With the movie having come out now and the Blu-Ray release approaching, we are now getting to the nitty gritty of parsing out what needs to be Level 2.  That aspect has not been completed yet.

For now, I'll leave it at that I think...long post already.

[gmrhodes13[501st]]

For me once again part of the issue comes down to color, as I've seen with other costumes it is very hard at times to get the same base colors/paints/materials in every location, (a common issue with TFA and TLJ Stormtroopers) this poses a problem with paint, although yes you could have color matched to a particular paint code but how much do I want to spend on a set of armor I'm wearing as a costume when I can just purchase an inexpensive base color.

Next is matching the color to a flexible product, again it comes down to the ability to color match, not the fact that one particular manufacturer has made an item in a different material but that the material in question can be color matched easily. I'm not saying we have to allow a particular manufacturer's product just because of the way they have made it but surely the ability to color match should be kept in mind. 

Ideally the whole suit should be made out of a flexible material to be screen accurate BUT what prop maker will start offering those and how much would that cost.

I'm still to move the split at the back of the neck to the shoulder to minimise the length and position of the slit but have an outdoor screening of TROS on Friday so have just run out of time. I also have just received my upgraded pieces from Jim, the extra details that had been noticed after more screen references were available, anyone with an early Jim kit should check in with him about those

I guess at the end of the day it comes down to what should be acceptable for base approval, a slit on the rear or side of neck although "not screen accurate" does not sound like a big issue to me since the majority of the time the public see us from the front, majority of photos are also taken from the front, don't think I've even seen a rear photo of me except for approval photos. 

Food for thought, if decided a slit is not allowable at basic how many GML's would actually notice that and just approve it with the slit (as we see with so many other things)

 

[Chaos[CMD-DCA]]

Hey has anyone thought about this ... TK helmets are difficult for some of us larger noggin dudes to put on so we twist it because it is an oval shape. What's to say that the neck opening be more of an oval shape and we just twist the noggin thru it? I haven't seen Jim's kit in person, Glen @gmrhodes13 does Jim's kit look like the neck opening could be oval'd enough to permit it to be twisted on?