# New phaser kit



## Prince of Styrene II (Feb 28, 2000)

Anyone got a spare $200?  Can you say, "Make it affordable?"

http://store.startrek.com/product/show/219?refcode=EM1110


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

There is some debate as to if this is actually off a "hero" version..the maker claims
he examined and measured an "original" piece from the collector that had it from
day one, when the series ended..Yet, his "detailed examination" was done in a parking lot...


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

It doesn't look $180 better than the Art Asylum version.


----------



## Lloyd Collins (Sep 25, 2004)

Well Star Trek fans have been known to waste their money, on anything TOS. I'm happy with my Playmate toys.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Well, John Long is an expert on all things TOS. He did indeed examine the only surviving hero prop (that we know of) and thoroughly documented it (calipers, photos, etc.). John is also a professional prop maker contributing work to DS9 among others. http://www.saucersoverhollywood.com/indexSAFE.html

He provided invaluable assistance (and a study model) to Master Replicas for their TOS phaser replica. He authored several articles on TOS props for Star Trek Communicator. He provided masters to Masterpiece Models for their TOS phaser kit a couple years back. Now he has obtained the license to produce the only hero phaser kit ever made using the exact period materials as the original. 

The price is way beyond me, but for serious TOS fans with the cash, this is the most accurate phaser kit yet offered.


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

jheilman said:


> Well, John Long is an expert on all things TOS. He did indeed examine the only surviving hero prop (that we know of) and thoroughly documented it (calipers, photos, etc.). John is also a professional prop maker contributing work to DS9 among others. http://www.saucersoverhollywood.com/indexSAFE.html
> 
> He provided invaluable assistance (and a study model) to Master Replicas for their TOS phaser replica. He authored several articles on TOS props for Star Trek Communicator. He provided masters to Masterpiece Models for their TOS phaser kit a couple years back. Now he has obtained the license to produce the only hero phaser kit ever made using the exact period materials as the original.
> The price is way beyond me, but for serious TOS fans with the cash, this is the most accurate phaser kit yet offered.


I can't say I was all that impressed with his Phaser 2..His hand unit was waay off for someone who Took "detailed measurements" and is supposed to be an authority..& I would have done something real "stupid" like replicate the entire pistol, if I got a license..I sold off my Master replicas phaser due to a fair amount of what I had seen to be inconsistencies from what I had seen on the show, and there are other experts in the field that have been around longer than him, that also agree that his pieces aint what they're cracked up ta be...but again, to anyone that wants to drop $200.00 on a piece you have to build as well, good luck!, but I cant agree its the best phaser yet offered..


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

Prince of Styrene II said:


> Anyone got a spare $200?  Can you say, "Make it affordable?"
> 
> http://store.startrek.com/product/show/219?refcode=EM1110


 
LOL..Thats another thing about Mr Long..None of his professed detailed copies 
of "Originals" were ever affordable..Before Master Replicas and the Star Trek Stores put out thier Communicators ( With all the bells & whistles) This Boy was hitting up collectors for $700.00 to $800.00 for his gadgets, and all they did was have a Glued in $20.00 stopwatch in em..Oh well..as PT Barnum said....


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

I picked up a "23rd Century Pistol" kit at Wonderfest, any of you phaser experts know how accurate it is? I've thought about getting another Art Asylum Type II to rob the electronics from.


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

Its not a bad piece, as I 've built it a few myself..But To some self professed "experts"
like mr Long, its not dead on...


----------



## Tyboy4umodels (Apr 26, 2005)

I think it is really great they are coming out with a few things to celebrate the 40th anniversary of Star Trek,too rich for my blood though.I am just glad I looked at these threads I have been real busy updating my thread on my son Tyler and my bash build of the new race the Tygerians and their Battle Cruiser.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

PhilipMarlowe said:


> I picked up a "23rd Century Pistol" kit at Wonderfest, any of you phaser experts know how accurate it is? I've thought about getting another Art Asylum Type II to rob the electronics from.


My impression is that it can be accurized to a great extent. If you have one or can find someone with an MR version, you can see the areas that need tweaking. In and of itself, except for the P1 being a bit too thin, IMHO, it's pretty good. In fact, you may have better luck accurizing the Art Asylum P1 and mate it to the kit's P2.

If building it, you'll probably want to use some screws on the inside of the P2 where the handle connects to beef it up some.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

I like the Art Asylum, but the whole phaser feels just a little bit too small in my hand. I'll have to dig out my 23rd and Art Asylum this weekend, I've been meaning to do one for awhile to go with my other sci-fi weapons.

Mating the AA P1 with the 23rd body is a pretty cool idea, Prof, and without having both in front of me it seems like it would cut some work down too. Not to mention adding pretty lights and sounds for a lot less than the electronic FX kits for the 23rd.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Well, I'm sensing some history here between Zathros and JL, so I'll leave that alone. 

The MR phaser was BASED in part on JL's study model. They detoured dramatically in some areas with mixed results. As for JL's previous prop sales, as I recall weren't they on eBay? Come on, the market sets the price. Coyle and Miarecki phaser replicas have brought huge eBay prices too.

As to the 23rd Century Pistol kit, yes it has "issues" on accuracy, but can be a nice starting point for a pretty accurate replica. I modified mine with a rising sight, aluminum extras and a spring-mounted phaser 1.


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Wow! Nice job there, jheilman! Gotta find one of those one of these days. 

'Course, not to insult, but that proves the point of just how close to accurate the Art Asylum Phaser toy is, at least in general looks. If you didn't know the differences, you might not be able to tell which was which.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Thanks. This is not the Art Asylum though. Wasn't sure from the wording if there was confusion on that. 

Yes, the AA toy isn't bad. It's smallish (especially the phaser 1), but it's based on the kit that was sold through Roddenberry.com, which is the same as the built versions sold at the Vegas Experience — both of which were created by the same guys who built the phasers for the DS9/TOS crossover episode. I think I have that correct. All from a faulty memory unit.


----------



## nx-o1troubles (Jul 20, 2006)

Well, the pictures above are cool, but the one they are selling at startrek.com is a joke. Its a model, not even a real prop. Not to mention its ugly, which is rare for ST. You probably wont be able to find the paint anywhere anyway. I tell ya, anything sci-fi is WAY overpriced these days.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

Impressive build :thumbsup:


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

I'm a little fuzzy with regard to the (alleged) inaccuracies of MR's phaser. Anyone care to illuminate them for me?


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

jheilman said:


> Well, I'm sensing some history here between Zathros and JL, so I'll leave that alone.
> 
> The MR phaser was BASED in part on JL's study model. They detoured dramatically in some areas with mixed results. As for JL's previous prop sales, as I recall weren't they on eBay!
> 
> ...


 

Your sensing wrong, JHeilman..The fact is I know of John Long from when he first started hawking his replicas on E-bay a few years back, and was selling Hand units for $600.00 , and touting them as "dead on"..and as far as the market setting the price, John Long set his _Starting_ price at $600.00..who I am well acquainted with is Richard Coyle, and Ed Miarecki, and have known them each for about 20 years..And as I had said in an previous post, I bought 
2 master Replicas Phasers and was greatly disappointed..The story (again) goes that John Long took "detailed measurements and photos" of an original Phaser in a Parking lot and the collector had them in his car..I find it quite hard to believe he took photos and measurements in that manner.I would think that anyone wanting such exact details would do that in a photo studio..In my opinion, for someone to tout such exact authenticity, he neglected to put an indicator light on the hand unit, and the hand unit sits horribly low on the pistol mount, and instead of replicating the light and the correct hieght of the hand unit, Mold mistakes that were never meant to be seen on screen were replicated..as far as he being "an authority " on all things Classic..Id say more that he is a "_self professed"_ authority..I have been collecting classic replicas since 1977..& I dont claim to be an authority, but I know this much..his "copies" are lacking, and to me, aint worth the price he's hawking em at..these days, anyone can buy a license to make star Trek 
products..Classic or otherwise ..But again, to anyone that wants to buy it..
Good luck..I am merely stating my opinion on his pieces based on my years of being in the prop replica hobby..I have about 5 or 6 23rd century kits, & I made one, and I'm going to make another one with a rising sight, and metal parts..alot better and _cheaper_ than Lining anyone elses pockets with my hard earned money..Especially if I dont believe it to be "dead on"..and I dont


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

Carson Dyle said:


> I'm a little fuzzy with regard to the (alleged) inaccuracies of MR's phaser. Anyone care to illuminate them for me?


They arent "alleged..they are true...its all in my reply to Jhielman..


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Zathros said:


> he neglected to put an indicator light on the hand unit, and the hand unit sits horribly low on the pistol mount, and instead of replicating the light and the correct hieght of the hand unit, Mold mistakes that were never meant to be seen on screen were replicated.


No doubt you're right; clearly you've devoted more time to the subject than I have.

I'm curious... to which "mold mistakes" are you refering?


----------



## Richard Compton (Nov 21, 2000)

Can anyone talk in more detail about the Art Asylum phaser? Or point me to a specific site or discussion somewhere? I'm really not interesting in delving back into the various prop boards (I'll just get lost in them again and I already visit too many hobby sites!)

What are it's strong points/weak points?

I have a couple 23rd Century phasers stored away. I intend to build them "right" and I have some upgrade kits for them (metal parts, electronics) but it'll have to wait, because I'm a crap modeller. Maybe I'll build them when I'm an old man. In the meantime, maybe I'll pick up an AA phaser. Not for modifying, but just as a cool toy.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Hey you don't like his work, fine. It is certainly more accurate than most earlier replicas. Perfect? No. 

Now we know that the MR was not entirely JL's design. MR did their own research and made their own masters. Innaccuracies in the MR are attributed to MR. 

I'm curious as to innaccuracies in JL-produced replicas. We can argue if they are overpriced (I would never even consider buying one), but what has been noted as innaccurate? I'm talking his later replicas after having better reference material.


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

jheilman said:


> Hey you don't like his work, fine. It is certainly more accurate than most earlier replicas. Perfect? No.
> 
> Now we know that the MR was not entirely JL's design. MR did their own research and made their own masters. Innaccuracies in the MR are attributed to MR.
> 
> I'm curious as to innaccuracies in JL-produced replicas. We can argue if they are overpriced (I would never even consider buying one), but what has been noted as innaccurate? I'm talking his later replicas after having better reference material.


I had a long chat with Bob Justin (Star Treks assistant producer), as well as Wah Chang in 1995, and Wah Designed and built the Communicators and Tricorders for the classic series..Mr Chang told me he only made 2 copies of anything for Star Trek, and any subsequent comms or Tricorders were copied and built by the studio prop shop.I did get a kick out of that later, since so far , E-bay has had about 200 comms and tricorders being described as "Original"..Wah Chang also told me that in all the years since he made those pieces, many people have showed him thier Comms and Tricorders, and he had yet to see one he built ( hence my criticisms as well as to copies of "Detailed Originals") .as to the Phasers: Bob Justman told me
that Throughout Star Treks three year run, the phasers were constantly being upgraded, and by the third season, they finally had what they wanted as the finalized design, with all the desired features..This Mr Long has Either a Very early phaser, which he considers to be the last word ( in which he is DEAD wrong, based on my interviews with Studio personnel), or has worked off a copy..as To Master replicas: I dont agree that Master Replicas changed Longs Master, Rather I think Long gave it to them that way..The glaring mistakes that led me to dumnp mine off was of course how low the hand unit sat on the mount..Nowhere in any of the episodes was that ever there, and by doing that, it threw off the visual design of the replica, and basically sucked. next , of course, was the absence of the indicator light atop the hand unit..Justman told me they probably forgot to put it on , or it just fell off, but Long thinks he knows better..lol, and of course, the rear fins: on the original pieces, apparently there was an indented mold "Guide " to show where the fins slip in and get glued on, or whatever way they attached it..it was NEVER meant to be seen on camera, but again, Long had thought in his infinite wisdom to replicate such a glaring mistake..I know, to many , small mistakes, but hell, if youre going to blow your Horn so LOUD to say that you 
did all this "Detailed and painstakingly accurate research, covering every inch of an original piece" then I think you should do a few things first:

1. Make sure the piece you are using for your resaearch is indeed an original
AND a finalized design.

2. dont copy mistakes..to me, that cheapens any piece..

Lastly: the communicator the Long hit collectors up for $700.0 + had
a $10.00 Stopwatch glued into it for the spinning Miore, that had a long brass shank sticking out the bottom of the piece as the on switch..Justman said
if there had been a better way to do it then, they would have, as that brass shank was never ever meant to be seen..but yet, Long made it as a "dead on " piece..only ONE comm had it. for close up shots..no other comm had that thing sticking out..my closing thought on the phaser is the reason I was unhappy about it was the cost, as a secondary gripe..at $500.00 a pop
none of those mistakes should have been there..especially with all the hype that long was the "God" of classic..judging by that body of work, he wasnt...


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Zathros said:


> Your sensing wrong, JHeilman..


I'm sensing the same thing as jheilman, based on every post you've made about this John Long fellow that... "takes him to task". It does indeed come across as you having issues w/the guy - either directly or otherwise. It's the "tone" of what you're writing - words and phrases about what he's done, such as "hawking his wares" (to paraphrase)

Just sayin'.


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

jheilman said:


> Now we know that the MR was not entirely JL's design. MR did their own research and made their own masters. Innaccuracies in the MR are attributed to MR.


Not True, as far as I have read and seen..Long was HIRED and was the ONLY 
one that did all the design work and "research" for the phaser..All Mr did, was buy the license, as far as the phaser, and communicator goes, and said so..
Thier advertisements stated a fact, but was misleading, in my opinion..it stated 
they did the research..what they meant was they Hired Long, and since he was a freelancer for them ,in that way Master replicas did the "research...and all the research that was encompassed, was buying one of each of Longs pieces...


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

Griffworks said:


> I'm sensing the same thing as jheilman, based on every post you've made about this John Long fellow that... "takes him to task". It does indeed come across as you having issues w/the guy - either directly or otherwise. It's the "tone" of what you're writing - words and phrases about what he's done, such as "hawking his wares" (to paraphrase)
> 
> Just sayin'.


Griff, you are partially correct, but NOT in the way you are implying..I do not know the man personally, but I "Take him to task" based on the pieces I bought from MR, and the prices he charged in the early days when he pitched his tent on E-bay, and I would tell him that directly ..Its America, and America is the top dog of capitalism, so I have no problem with anyone making a buck..but what I DO take issue with is what I call "exploitation of the Gullible"..I invite you to reread my posts again..."Taking specs of an "original" in a parking lot??..C'mon..that doesnt bring up suspicion??...$600.00 for a hand unit?? I know..its E-bay..if you dont want it, dont buy it..but it takes "big ones" if you know what I mean, to start a bid with that high of a price for an item that must have cost him ALOT less to make, and if you love the hobby so much, hows about making it a bit more affordable for those who like it as much as you..and again, the "authenticity" and "painstaking research " thing..I just dont buy it...Looks like Paramount took him down a few pegs as his hand unit sells for a mere (lol) $200.00...


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

Richard Compton said:


> Can anyone talk in more detail about the Art Asylum phaser? Or point me to a specific site or discussion somewhere? I'm really not interesting in delving back into the various prop boards (I'll just get lost in them again and I already visit too many hobby sites!)
> 
> What are it's strong points/weak points?
> 
> I have a couple 23rd Century phasers stored away. I intend to build them "right" and I have some upgrade kits for them (metal parts, electronics) but it'll have to wait, because I'm a crap modeller. Maybe I'll build them when I'm an old man. In the meantime, maybe I'll pick up an AA phaser. Not for modifying, but just as a cool toy.


The Art asylum Phaser was a direct copy of the HMS phaser that was sold on Roddenberry.com..not a bad piece at all..A few mistakes, but hell, they never said they were gonna make it "dead on" to begin with..a little surface work, and metal parts, and it would be a GREAT piece...The strong points of course, is the removable hand unit, and the electronics..the weak points are that the 
rising sight doesnt raise as high as it should, and the hand unit has a textured surface..thats it..just sand down the hand unit to start, and if youre handy with a bladesaw, get a piece of acrylic, and cut out a new sight and with a few hours work, (its a bit tricky, granted) you'd have a fairly accurate enough piece, and not nearly as expensive as these whiz bang almost "dead on " copies...


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

I ordered two of the JL kits.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Carson Dyle said:


> I'm a little fuzzy with regard to the (alleged) inaccuracies of MR's phaser. Anyone care to illuminate them for me?


The big thing I noticed in the photo comparisons and debate back and forth on the matter on the prop discussion board was the P1's top view contour being curved too far back. 

It does sit a little low in the saddle though that may be due to the front of the P2 being just a tad high.

Supposedly it was based on an original and, taking "originals" to mean any of the props (Chang or prop dept. built) used on screen during the run of the show, it could well have been. However, it doesn't seem to represent the "norm" for the phasers as seen on the show. 

As a whole, the phaser is idealized somewhat just as any model of the 1701 should be. I think it is an exceptionally fine piece for the price and like it for what it is and not necessarily what it is supposed to be. In other words, it is close enough for me even if it is a slight variation on the original phaser's general characteristics.

My recommendation is to look at the photos yourself and decide what you want in your phaser.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

Are the Art asylum, the MR, and the 23rd century all approximately the same size? And if not, which is most accurate sizewise? I've never held the MR or a built 23rd, but my Art Asylum sures seems smaller than what I remember on the TOS, I remember the type II being more of a handful.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

I'd have to dig them out of storage boxes to be sure but I'm thinking the MR is more accurate in overall size. The others can be altered in that regard (I'm thinking the handles need to be longer or bigger around  )

Be sure to get the accurate paint jobs on them. There are some out of the can spray paints that are nearly dead-on. The P1 should be dark gray, the P2 body should be a medium gray and the handle should be a dark, anodized bronze color.


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

PerfesserCoffee said:


> I'd have to dig them out of storage boxes to be sure but I'm thinking the MR is more accurate in overall size. The others can be altered in that regard (I'm thinking the handles need to be longer or bigger around  )
> 
> Be sure to get the accurate paint jobs on them. There are some out of the can spray paints that are nearly dead-on. The P1 should be dark gray, the P2 body should be a medium gray and the handle should be a dark, anodized bronze color.


Not exactly..again, the third season phasers had the handle and pistol grip
all the same color..OR you could even go back to the First season and just
paint the handle white, and the rest black...Thats only one version you are referring to..


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Zathros said:


> Not exactly..again, the third season phasers had the handle and pistol grip
> all the same color..OR you could even go back to the First season and just
> paint the handle white, and the rest black...Thats only one version you are referring to..



It's the only worthy version.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

Well, according to this the MR and AA are virtually identical in size, though there are some differences between the two besides price.

http://www.epinions.com/pr-Toys-Art_Asylum_Star_Trek_Classic_Trek_Tek_Phaser_Number_2_Action_Figure/display_~reviews

I woulda sworn it was bigger onscreen in my youth, but if you look at this screen grab you can see the handle is pretty slim.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Zathros said:


> Bob Justman told me
> that Throughout Star Treks three year run, the phasers were constantly being upgraded, and by the third season, they finally had what they wanted as the finalized design, with all the desired features..This Mr Long has Either a Very early phaser, which he considers to be the last word ( in which he is DEAD wrong, based on my interviews with Studio personnel), or has worked off a copy..


JL examined the Greg Jein-owned hero phaser. This is not the first time this particular phaser has been documented. Coyle has pictures of the piece on his site and it was also disassembled and photographed before Jein owned it (I believe). I have numerous pictures of this piece and I doubt it's lineage is in dispute.

The original B&W phasers were made at Desilu (3 heroes and 5 stunt versions if memory serves) and Roddenberry and Justman were never satisfied. They took them to Wah Chang mid-season 1 for upgrades. The union prop guys were not pleased. Wah changed the color scheme, added fins on the back and side rails on the phaser 1 as well as other cosmetic changes. They emerged with the most familiar color scheme which is dark gray phaser 1, medium gray phaser 2 body and a bronze phaser 2 handle. I don't think Wah changed any of internal mechanisms as most of the functionality was visible in early season 1 with the B&W models. There was the separating P1 and P2 (Sulu inserts a P1 into a P2 body in "Enemy Within"), rotating thumbwheel on the P1 causing the sight to rise and the emitter to extend. Once rotated fully, a switch activates the grain of wheat bulb in the emitter. The trigger on the P2 activated the light in the P2 emitter.

There were also very crude stunt models made which varied widely and were described by Dee Kelley as crapizoids.



Zathros said:


> as To Master replicas: I dont agree that Master Replicas changed Longs Master, Rather I think Long gave it to them that way..The glaring mistakes that led me to dumnp mine off was of course how low the hand unit sat on the mount..Nowhere in any of the episodes was that ever there, and by doing that, it threw off the visual design of the replica, and basically sucked. next , of course, was the absence of the indicator light atop the hand unit..Justman told me they probably forgot to put it on , or it just fell off, but Long thinks he knows better..lol, and of course, the rear fins: on the original pieces, apparently there was an indented mold "Guide " to show where the fins slip in and get glued on, or whatever way they attached it..it was NEVER meant to be seen on camera, but again, Long had thought in his infinite wisdom to replicate such a glaring mistake..I know, to many , small mistakes, but hell, if youre going to blow your Horn so LOUD to say that you did all this "Detailed and painstakingly accurate research, covering every inch of an original piece" then I think you should do a few things first:


Well, here is how MR addressed the issue:

Let me first reassure you that all the dimensions for this recreation of the TOS Phaser were taken from an original prop held by a private collector. MR digitally scanned and took all their dimensions from it.

[JL didn't ever claim to digitally scan the prop, so this lends credence to the theory that MR did independent research]

However there are inevitable discrepancies that happen when you have to manufacture a quality reproduction that will bear a retail price of $399:00.

The original prop, is a banana. There isn't a straight line on the piece, and its side to side symetry - ISNT. If you measure down a center line no two dimensions, side to side, match.

Side by side comparison shots with a fibreglass casting - from a hand carved original - with MR's machined and metal cast body, will not and cannot be expected to yield a perfect match.

When manufacturing you inevitably have to make compromises to facilitate the particular processes you have chosen. Draft angles and clearance tolerances for injection molds and die cast tools differ. Complex shapes require some tough decisions as to what you can live with, must live with, and what needs to be compromised by a couple of thousandths. These calls come into play every day when you're designing something as complex as this Phaser reproduction.

It is not as easy as dropping a wonky original in a bucket of silicone. Judgement calls about manufacturing a prop - that was roughly made in the first instance and was never intended for up close scrutiny - have to be made.

Such as -

The release button was adjusted slightly down from its higher more correct position. Why? Because its mechanisms interfered with the top switch's internal circuit board. MR didn't make a mistake, they made a judgement call enforced by the desire to have this prop contain all its bells and whistles.

The recessed area where the back fins sit are different shapes, side to side. MR chose one representative shape and mirrored it. On the original these differ considerably.

The fins on the model are stepped and very crooked and, again vary from side to side. The factory drew a line from the bottom one to the top one to smooth out the transition. A judgement, and an aesthetic call.

The top of the Phaser, underneath the top dial switch, has a four ridged pattern. On most other phasers this has been represented as three. The prop MR examined showed evidence that it was originally four and one had broken off. So four it has.

The three lines on the side of the P2, beneath the P1, differ on the original prop in thickness, shape and positioning from side to side. MR cleaned these up.

MR made the handle work far better than it does on the prop. A difficult design that is not terribly practical, but they had to make it work since that is a known an integral feature of the piece and couldn't be compromised.

end message from MR-


Not all the phasers had the jewel on the P1. We can argure that they SHOULD have.  

Judge for yourself whether the JL study model was manipulated prior to creation of the MR.

JL's study model which MR purchased as a reference.









MR's finished phaser.









Can't argue that the P1 seems way short and that area in front of the fins was a bad call on MR's part. The angle should have mirrored the angle of the fins. 



Zathros said:


> 1. Make sure the piece you are using for your resaearch is indeed an original
> AND a finalized design.
> 
> 2. dont copy mistakes..to me, that cheapens any piece..


It was indeed an original and used throughout the series. As this is the only known surviving hero phaser, how can you use something else as reference? Rumor has it there were indeed three heroes made and one is owned by a private collector in Japan. No confirmation about that. The hero phaser pictured in the book "The Making of Star Trek" is not the Jein hero. There are differences in all the props as they were hand-made. Also, when comparing color schemes and dimensions, remember the hero, mid-grade and stunt versions were all quite different. The heroes had larger grips to accommodate batteries and generally better finishing and detail. The creaters often used mid-grade versions for close-ups instead of the hero for whatever reason. Of course, they never counted on fanatics with DVD players did they? Also, the props suffered wear and tear during filming and very sloppy repairs were made.



Zathros said:


> Lastly: the communicator the Long hit collectors up for $700.0 + hada $10.00 Stopwatch glued into it for the spinning Miore, that had a long brass shank sticking out the bottom of the piece as the on switch..Justman saidif there had been a better way to do it then, they would have, as that brass shank was never ever meant to be seen..but yet, Long made it as a "dead on " piece..only ONE comm had it. for close up shots..no other comm had that thing sticking out..


That's a stylistic choice. For that particular piece, he chose to replicate the hero "as it was." I have seen other replicas of his that are more "idealized" versions. Personally, if I were interested in a true replica hero comm, I would want the details like the JL. Personal preference. It was not the ON switch, but an access opening to wind the stopwatch. Otherwise, they would have had to disassemble it between takes which would have been a PITA. It wasn't considered a mistake at the time. It was the solution Wah Chang applied to the problem. Replicating that keeps alive the problem-solving skills from Projects Unlimited.

I've never met John nor corresponded with him, but he has always seemed to be an up-front guy and I have followed his prop work for years. Way out of my price range, but that doesn't prevent me from admiring his skill.


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

jheilman said:


> JL examined the Greg Jein-owned hero phaser. This is not the first time this particular phaser has been documented. Coyle has pictures of the piece on his site and it was also disassembled and photographed before Jein owned it (I believe). I have numerous pictures of this piece and I doubt it's lineage is in dispute.
> 
> *>SNIPPAGE OF ALL THE PICS AND OTHER UNNECESSARY QUOTES<*
> 
> I've never met John nor corresponded with him, but he has always seemed to be an up-front guy and I have followed his prop work for years. Way out of my price range, but that doesn't prevent me from admiring his skill.


LOL..Sigh...Thanks JLHielman, but I am well aware of how Mr addressed the
issue, as I read it when they first posted it to cover thier rear ends..
I didnt jump into this discussion from "scratch"..I've seen and read all that before..All I can say is that I still stand by how I feel about these "dead on props" and I stand by my earlier posts...& I still contend that Mr Longs & Mr's phaser Copies are not the "definitive " pieces..and lastly: why would Mr "digitally scan" an original piece,if they had Mr Long's "detailed and painfully accurately" researched faithful copy??..one of the things that adds to my skepticism..In addition if there is only "one surviving original hero unit" which one did mr "scan"?? ANOTHER "Original hero unit???..maybe I'll look under my bed..I might have an original "hero unit" all these years and not know it!..lol..My comments here to you, JLHielman, is not intended to belittle what you are saying, but rather to what Long and Mr are posting..But based on what was just said..I thought the only "other hero piece" was in Japan?? did MR fly out there to scan the piece???..as To Wah Changs "solution" to the problem on the comm:..That may well have been..but again, if the technology of that day would have afforded it not to have been done that way, then why the hell recreate that now??..except to rake in big bucks, of course..The only reason it was done was to have the miore spin..its now done easier, simpler and cleaner..and a hell of alot cheaper than $700.00..and with that, I think I covered my opinions and thoughts based on my own research..I aint no prop replica builder..But I've been into them long before mr.Long came onto the scene,
and I have seen many photos of what was proported to be "Originals"..I have yet to see one that resembled Longs..Could be some of those pics were replicas..and even the one Long copied could be a copy, as even Greg Jein, was fooled by copies that were very faithfully made, but yet to me were more accurate than the one Long copied off of...I also invite you to reread my conversation with Bob Justman..I would say his comments would carry a bit more wieght , than..say a John Long or any other copycat?...and thanks again for these pics that I had seen so many times before..Again I have been collecting classic Trek replicas since 1977..those pics once again reminded me why I sold off both my Mr pieces...Back to the world of modeling...


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

MR and JL examined the same prop. Thought that was clear.

It's all been said. 

Congrats on your prop-collecting longevity. Sorry you have been so soured on JL.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

PhilipMarlowe said:


> Well, according to this the MR and AA are virtually identical in size, though there are some differences between the two besides price.


The AA and the 23rd Century kit are essentially identical (a few minor details don't match, but their proportions are pretty clearly derived from the same source).

The Playmates one isn't even close.


----------



## Richard Compton (Nov 21, 2000)

Zathros said:


> The Art asylum Phaser was a direct copy of the HMS phaser that was sold on Roddenberry.com..not a bad piece at all..A few mistakes, but hell, they never said they were gonna make it "dead on" to begin with..a little surface work, and metal parts, and it would be a GREAT piece...The strong points of course, is the removable hand unit, and the electronics..the weak points are that the
> rising sight doesnt raise as high as it should, and the hand unit has a textured surface..thats it..just sand down the hand unit to start, and if youre handy with a bladesaw, get a piece of acrylic, and cut out a new sight and with a few hours work, (its a bit tricky, granted) you'd have a fairly accurate enough piece, and not nearly as expensive as these whiz bang almost "dead on " copies...


 Does that mean that a AA phaser is a lot like the Trials and Tribulations phasers? Those were HMS ones right? Does anyone know what they used in In A Mirror Darkly? MR?


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

Those of you thinking about improving an AA might find this interesting:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Star-Trek-Art-Asylum-Phaser-Detail-


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

Richard Compton said:


> Does that mean that a AA phaser is a lot like the Trials and Tribulations phasers? Those were HMS ones right? Does anyone know what they used in In A Mirror Darkly? MR?


From what I've heard, the AA pieces themselves were used in that episode...


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Zathros said:


> From what I've heard, the AA pieces themselves were used in that episode...


That's what I read on the prop boards.


----------



## Ignatz (Jun 20, 2000)

LOL. I guess that makes them canon. Unless, of course, you don't count "Enterprise" as canon... ...which I don't.


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

In addition, I am no "newbie" to the field of Prop replica collecting..I have written many articles for Richard Coyles online magazine...


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

Just confirming ... I have a 23rd-century pistol. What are the P1/P2/handle paint schemes for each season?

1st: black/black/white?
2nd: dark gray/med.gray/bronze?
3rd: dark gray/med.gray/med.gray?

Thanks.


----------



## KUROK (Feb 2, 2004)

third season same as second

also, B&W colors used for only first seven episodes


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

SteveR said:


> Just confirming ... I have a 23rd-century pistol. What are the P1/P2/handle paint schemes for each season?
> 
> 1st: black/black/white?
> 2nd: dark gray/med.gray/bronze?
> ...


Steve,
Dont let any "seasoned Pros" mislead you..The handle paint scheme on the third season pistols were the SAME color as the rest of the lower half of the units..


----------



## KUROK (Feb 2, 2004)

Zathros said:


> Steve,
> Dont let any "seasoned Pros" mislead you..The handle paint scheme on the third season pistols were the SAME color as the rest of the lower half of the units..



Do I have to post screen caps to prove I'm right?


----------



## drmcoy (Nov 18, 2004)

*Art Asylum VS 23rd Century*

The Art Asylum phaser is a close copy of the HMS phaser (company that made them for Deep Space Nine Trials and Tribbleations).

The 23rd Century kit has MANY differnces from the AA. It is my humblest of opinions that the AA looks more like what was used on the TV series. There have been some rumors I've heard over the years that the 23rd Century kit was based on an original black & white phaser prop -- but if so, I never saw one quite like it in the actual TV series -- but that doesn't mean it wasn't there.

For my money, the Art Asylum is a very nice toy replica. If you have a hundred bucks or so, I would order the Pistol Phaser kit from Roddenberry.com -- same look as AA, but made of resin and machined metal pieces -- perhaps the best phaser PISTOL replica kit currently available.

For $20 or so, you can get the phaser squirt gun from the STAR TREK EXPERIENCE store -- but it looks a LOT like the Master Replicas phaser, which many have slammed for the hand unit dimension inaccuarcies.

If I find the time, I'll post pictures of the Rodd.com kit, the AA piece, the MR piece and the squirt gun for comparison.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

As to the history of the 23rd C kit, I would doubt the claim of a B&W phaser. I suppose it may have been a mid-grade version that left the lot during production, but I believe most (or all) of the B&W phasers were "upgraded" with the new color scheme. 

I have heard of the season 3 color scheme, but I don't know for certain if all phasers were changed or just mid-grade/stunt versions. Also, I wonder why the change was made (if it was ). It certainly would not have been noticed on-screen back in the day. Why make a change that will make no difference? 

Yes, screen-cap evidence would be welcome to support both positions.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

This shot is from "The Cloud Minders" from late in season 3.

Color scheme is clearly the standard dark gray/medium gray/anodized bronze created early in season one.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

Since we also see this phaser tossed in from offscreen, I doubt it's a working hero.

Definitely not one of the crapazoid stunt phasers, but just a step below the hero prop.


----------



## KUROK (Feb 2, 2004)

Here's two captures from "Cloud Minders" which was one of the last episodes of Season 3.
Both the rubber stunt phaser and the "hero" show the charcoal gray Phaser 1, dark gray phaser 2, and dark bronze handle.



















Edit:
D'oh, sorry PerfesserCoffee....didn't see that you had already posted the hero shot....


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

KUROK said:


> Do I have to post screen caps to prove I'm right?


Kurok, ..I have been watching the episodes for 40 years myself... screen caps or not,Perhaps not ALL of them were the same color..but there definitely were phasers where the grip and lower half _were _the same color....and some of the
phasers had a blue "tint to them as well, and Richard Coyle agrees on this, as
we've discussed that many times, and long before MR or Long showed up...


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

KUROK said:


> Here's two captures from "Cloud Minders" which was one of the last episodes of Season 3.
> Both the rubber stunt phaser and the "hero" show the charcoal gray Phaser 1, dark gray phaser 2, and dark bronze handle.
> 
> 
> ...


Ok..Those are only 2 pieces..I'll wait until you post the other 12 to 14 more pieces that were used on the third season...and take a look at "the apple" episode while your at it...


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

drmcoy said:


> The Art Asylum phaser is a close copy of the HMS phaser (company that made them for Deep Space Nine Trials and Tribbleations).
> 
> The 23rd Century kit has MANY differnces from the AA. It is my humblest of opinions that the AA looks more like what was used on the TV series. There have been some rumors I've heard over the years that the 23rd Century kit was based on an original black & white phaser prop -- but if so, I never saw one quite like it in the actual TV series -- but that doesn't mean it wasn't there.
> 
> ...


..C'mon Doc...You ALWAYS have the time..You are a "gentleman of Liesure"...


----------



## Richard Compton (Nov 21, 2000)

Ignatz said:


> LOL. I guess that makes them canon. Unless, of course, you don't count "Enterprise" as canon... ...which I don't.


 That's strange, since it would make you wrong.


----------



## KUROK (Feb 2, 2004)

Zathros said:


> Ok..Those are only 2 pieces..I'll wait until you post the other 12 to 14 more pieces that were used on the third season...and take a look at "the apple" episode while your at it...


I won't argue with you if you can show me some evidence.
I have been on the phaser board at ASAP for three years and we've been through all the color discussions before.


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

KUROK said:


> I won't argue with you if you can show me some evidence.
> I have been on the phaser board at ASAP for three years and we've been through all the color discussions before.


Kurok,
And I have been into the prop replica hobby for 29 years, and I have in my collection, from the Worst examples, right up and into what I consider the best ...and just because one person examined ONE piece that has been accepted as an original, does not mean that it can never for all time, be open for debate or question.. Its never my intention to argue with you, or anyone else..Ahhh..The Asap boad..I was there for awhile, but that board to me, in the Classic Star trek phaser catagory, is nothing more than a John Long 'hero worship" page..whenever anyone questions his "authority"..they are immediately "chastised", as if any comments against his exhaulted opinion, were a personal attack on him, and some were "cast out"..Hence, anyone accusing me of "being on a mission" against him: It was never him I "attacked"..it was he & his supporters refusal to accept that is self learned opinion was not "martial law", and that was taken personally by him and his supporters..lol..I cannot see where it is a cardinal sin to question anyone's "research"..about anything...In fact,I myself am what I, and many others in another field consider me an "expert", and on an occasion or two, my research was questioned, and I never took it so greviously personal as Long or his supporters... and I never corresponded with Long directly, but his supporters immediately would hurl themselves to his defence whenever his research was challenged...After all, all he ever "examined" was _ONE _version of an Original piece,and in a parking Lot no less.. ... Part of my evidence, as I said earlier , is to view "the apple", and in addition, Richard Coyle and others who have been around for many years, support my contention as well..In any case, As said by others its all a matter of personal choice, but again, personal choice is NOT "fact", and it is basically "inauthentic" to make personal choice (opinion) fact...there is NO possible way, _anyone_, Long , Coyle, Jein or anyone else is going to be able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, that all the phasers ever made had different color handles..again all one need do is _WATCH_ third season episodes, and even some second season ones as well..and a fair amount of episodes bear me out..In the end, all it is is a 40 year old make believe "toy"..NOT the holy grail of life...But again at the risk of repetition, the main point here is true "authenticity", and not blanket opinion made to be fact from a few pieces, that no one can prove was from a particular year or episode for that matter ..As far as I am concerned, I have no interest in any way whatsoever,in any of longs "products"..Its obvious that He and his supporters are too narrow minded and he is too full of his own self importance to accept that he may not be 100% correct..and any question at all to him about his units are considered "personal attacks'..I regret being so "blunt".. but I can see no other way to put forth the situation in regards to this...At the prices he charges for his "gems"..he should want them to be as "authentic" as possible..He should have no issue with the possibly of _anyone_ pointing out that he may be wrong...


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Zathros, 

Couple things: 

1) Paragraphs are your friend. They help to better define what you're trying to get across by allowing people to read your posts much more easily. I'm sure that I'm not the only one who has a hard time following what you've written above. 

2) Judging by the tone of your posts - you may or may not be one of those "seasoned pro's" yourself. Please keep in mind that just because you _say_ you're right doesn't make it so. Kurok and others have offered their visual proof and you further challenge their proof w/o offering your own. Instead you dismiss what they've got to say out of hand and telling them they've got to produce more. 

3) You do indeed seem to have a lot of personal issues w/John Long. Again, the tone of your posts tells all. Please, remember that there are to be no personal attacks against others. I don't know John Long from Adam and same goes for you. However, that doesn't mean you get to impinge upon his reputation because of that.

If need be, I'll lock this thread down and let Dave and/or Hank decide if they want to unlock it again. Please keep it civil. 

Thanks,


----------



## KUROK (Feb 2, 2004)

Zathros,

I hear what you're saying. As I recall, Long didn't post all that much and when he did he was pretty cool. It was his supporters that were ugly. Yes, I agree with you there.

There were indeed some variations. Some of the stunt phasers were black handled, not bronze. However, if we regard only the brief glimpses of the "hero" as the driving force in the colors then we have to go with the bronze handle. This is mainly due to the only known hero (the Jein phaser) having this color. 

It is interesting that the DS9 episode Trials and Tribbleations did in fact paint the handles and bodies of the Phaser 2 the same color (Krylon Smoke Gray). 

I'm open-minded. Show me some caps of what you are seeing.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

I suspect the confusion stems from the bronze color of the handle, and the reflective nature of that color.

Previously, I'd always taken that shot from "The Cloud Minders" as proof that the phaser was pretty much all gray, except for the phaser I. Knowing that it's actually bronze, and with better resolution than the old Sony Trinitron we had back in the 70s, I can now see the difference.

So, basically, what it looks like is gonna depend rather heavily on the lighting conditions.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Yes, lighting, film stocks and video transfers all add to the confusion of color. Screen caps may not tell the whole truth, but unless someone produces quality still shots of the various props taken during production, all we have left are screen caps and memory of those few who were there. Even production people have proven to not be completely reliable. It has been 40 years after all.

An often asked question is where have all the phasers gone? In the hands of quiet collectors?


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

Griffworks said:


> Zathros,
> 
> Couple things:
> 
> ...


Griff,
Thats What I Love about the ASAP board, and of course, your recent post just now..LOL I would ask you to RE-Read what I wrote..It was not _I _That had any "personal issues", and this is supposed to be the free and open exchange of ideas and opinions on any hobby related subject..the "tone" of my posts is open to interpretation..I already said more than once, that I was not attacking John personally, but rather that he took "personally" anyone
who would cite a difference to his facts..That tells me, its HIM, not I that would have the issue..my quest, I remind you again, was authenticity...

I am not "impinging " upon anyones "reputation"..I am challenging his "facts"..I did not say John did anything unlawful, nor did I attack his personal integrity..But I will not write or state my opinion according to YOURS, or anyone elses direction..And I have been civil..again, I am challenging facts, Not his personal character..I worked for a law office for 15 years..believe me, I know the difference,,I regret you have difficulty in reading my posts..I will try to keep it a bit more simple for you..but in reality, as I am sure you will be glad to hear, I really have nothing further to add on this subject, and not because of your post, I assure you..I said it all..

But I will say this: I have been on this board for about 6 years..and I seem to see to a degree, the same issue that happens on some boards, such as asap:
God FORBID anyone should disagree too strongly or have a difference of opinion, and stick to that opinion..If anyone should have the slightest negative thing to say about a kit or company..the thread is locked...Hardly
an open exchange in my humble opinion...If anyone for example is not happy with RC2, for instance, the moderator says "How Dare You!!" and locks the thread down..and many things said were simply facts, such as they dont produce what many of us like..You dont like my opinion??fine..but I feel I have the right to state it as I please..as the Old saying goes: I may not agree with what you said, but I will fight for your right to say it"..and Griff..My "proof" in regards to this is the TV series itself..

If your'e near a TV, and if you have a DVD set, I invite you to watch the series..And as well, in regards to your recent post to me, some have agreed with what I've said...And of course, you are free to "lock down" what you wish..I suppose opinions or challenges to any "facts" are only allowable based on what the moderator Personally approves of...and then _ONLY _if its written in a manner that must be approved of as well...I would also suggest, Griff, you Read Kurocks last post.....Bearing out what I've said in regards to Longs "supporters"..I remind you I didnt post it,Kurok did..

As far as I myself not being a "seasoned Pro":..I have been collecting replicas for 29 years, and I have interviewed "seasoned Pros"..such as the assistant producer of the original series, and have written articles on Star Trek prop replicas as well for Richard Coyles online magazine..I may not be a "seasoned Pro" but I am not a "rookie" either...


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

_Where have all the phasers gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the phasers gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the phasers gone?
Gone to dealers every one
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?_


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Zathros - the "tone" (know how much you love those quotes) of your posts is the main point of contention. You've hardly been attacked, but you HAVE belittled everyone who disagrees with YOU. 

Watch the show? We all have. Specifics please. Oh right, when we pin you down to specifics you belittle some more and say you've "said it all." 

Frankly the "I've been doing this longer than you sonny" attitude carries no weight with me. Make claims and back them up. That will win the argument every day. I'm always ready to learn more info about TOS and its props. But in light of the years of reading I've done on various props boards, studying endless screen caps and reading interviews from those in-the-know, I need more than your word when you challenge current popular opinion.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

The one thing I've learned during the vast majority of my forty-two years on this orb is that there is a wealth of information that we *don't* know about the production of Star Trek, especially in the fine details. Case in point: my presumably simple question regarding the construction of the full size Galileo shuttlecraft. It's been known since the time of the show that AMT built the thing, but _where_ was it built? When was it delivered? How did the design process go from Matt Jefferies' cigar-shaped design to the much-reviled "butter dish"? The design process of the Enterprise can almost be nailed down to a day-by-day timeline, but the shuttlecraft almost seems to pop out of the ether fully formed, with just a few tantalizing tidbits on a few sketchs that _might_ have played a part in the final design, with no dates to give a conclusive timeline.

As for the phasers, criticize John Long all you want for any leaps in logic he may have taken in his endeavors, with more than a little justification, but the fact remains that until he examined that phaser, it was _not_ widely known that the pistol grip was bronze and not black or gray. If it was, in fact, the Jein phaser that he examined, why didn't Jein provide those details? After all, he's no stranger to the fan community, or to prop making, why wasn't he writing those articles for the Communicator and showing off his treasures on that featurette on the TOS Season 3 DVD set?

To a certain extent, we should be grateful that so much previously unknown information is coming out, not just about the phaser but on several aspects of the original show.


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

jheilman said:


> Zathros - the "tone" (know how much you love those quotes) of your posts is the main point of contention. You've hardly been attacked, but you HAVE belittled everyone who disagrees with YOU.
> 
> Watch the show? We all have. Specifics please. Oh right, when we pin you down to specifics you belittle some more and say you've "said it all."
> 
> Frankly the "I've been doing this longer than you sonny" attitude carries no weight with me. Make claims and back them up. That will win the argument every day. I'm always ready to learn more info about TOS and its props. But in light of the years of reading I've done on various props boards, studying endless screen caps and reading interviews from those in-the-know, I need more than your word when you challenge current popular opinion.


Jhielman,
I suppose my interviews with "those in the know": Bob justman and Wah Chang,carries no wieght, since I didnt examine an original??..(oh well..there goes that double standard again)...
I cannot see how you can put forth that I've belittled anyones opinion here..
This is not the Asap board..everyone has the right to thier unedited 
and uncensored opinion, as long as it it not insulting or verbally abusive,
and I know I have done neither...
I have given you the specifics you keep asking..Watch the episodes more closely..I do not have the capability to "zoom in" on episodes you may have, and post thier results here..that does not mean I am wrong, because I cannot.However I know what I've seen, nor did I say "I have been around longer than YOU, Sonny", even though I have..What I DID say was that Coyle, and others in his area of expertise, agree with me..and believe me , not much of what was posted here "carries any wieght" with me, as well, since they were ony a couple of pieces..

Interesting that you need more than my "word" , however someone that examined "one Original Piece" is automatically respected and gets all the repect, and his "opinion" from ONE sole unit carries all the wieght in the universe...hmm..seems to me a double standard applies here..In any case, as I 've said..I have posted all I am going to post on this subject..I am content with the replicas I have, and good luck to all that have thiers...I will refrain from further replies to this subject, lest I will be charged again with "being on a mission"..my mission is authenticity..my PM of course, is open, and if asked THERE, I will reply...and Hielman, I dont need anyone to direct me how to make a "claim"..I've already made it...and I stand by it...


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

I'll just say that it is possible to make critisizing comments about disagreeing with some common ideas about the props without mentioning any names. That's a sure way to stick to the point of contention vs. bringing up personalities that may or may not rub someone the wrong way. 

I respect the various opinions on the matters of the different phaser schemes but I disagree with some of them from what I've observed onscreen and from what I've learned from others. My rationale is that the beauty or hero props were the standard and it matters little if the rough copies had the same scheme or not. 

Therefore, it is apparent to me that the B/W phasers and the dark gray/medium gray/bronze phasers are the only standard paint schemes that are relevant to my pursuit of an idealized vs. attempting "exact" copies of nice props AND of crappy props.


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Zathros said:


> Griff,
> Thats What I Love about the ASAP board, and of course, your recent post just now..LOL I would ask you to RE-Read what I wrote..It was not _I _That had any "personal issues", and this is supposed to be the free and open exchange of ideas and opinions on any hobby related subject..the "tone" of my posts is open to interpretation..
> *>SNIPPERINO!<*


And *I* have interpretated it be _malicious in tone_. Judging by others comments and PM's that I've received you've gotten other folks upset w/the tone, so I'm not the only one who's "interpreted" your tone as belitting and condescending. 

You've been warned and now you're done in this thread. You constantly belittle others and offer nothing in the way of proof - other than your claims as an "expert". You've offered no links to these articles you mention, yet expect us to take your word on faith while refuting the proof that others have given. This may be the way things are done at ASAP - and as I've been told it apparently is - but that's not how it's done here. 

This is indeed a place to exhange ideas and opinions on others. However, you've crossed the line in to the maligning of anothers reputations. You can state your opinion here even if it differs and I'll back you up on that - as long as you don't go over the top as you have here. 

If you post in this thread again I'll request that Hank BAN you from these forums.


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

I think I'll paint mine dark/med/med. Bronze just doesn't jibe with my oft-unreliable childhood memories, and white looks kind of odd to me. 

That's just personal preference. Thanks for the info, chaps.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

The bronze color is very subtle. More like a slightly "warm" metallic color like titanium than a deeply saturated brass or copper.


----------



## sambob (Apr 3, 2006)

I doubt my two cents will end the debate but, here go's
1) Exact color will forever be a lost cause, unless someone can provide numbers off the paint can used to paint the original props.

2)In my mind until someone takes DIRECT molds off an exsiting original prop from the show and makes castings from that, anything else will always be someones Interpitation of the Information availible no matter how genuine the source.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Trek Ace said:


> The bronze color is very subtle. More like a slightly "warm" metallic color like titanium than a deeply saturated brass or copper.


Right. The dark anodized bronze (which is supposed to be a close match) has a lot of gray in it. In addition, as pointed out earlier, the metallic nature of the paint does a lot more reflecting. After observing quite a few shots of the P2 phasers on DVD and enlarging them, the handles (power packs) go from being light gray to dark bronze to a brownish gray all in a few steps under studio lighting.


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

Interesting. Maybe a dark gray, slightly tinted toward bronze would give the look of two different yet similar metals. The overall effect would be a mostly uniform P2 unit, but with a bit of subtle material variation. Hmm.


----------



## KUROK (Feb 2, 2004)

sambob said:


> I doubt my two cents will end the debate but, here go's
> 1) Exact color will forever be a lost cause, unless someone can provide numbers off the paint can used to paint the original props.



Mr. Long did indeed match the paint colors while he was doing his examination.
This info has been posted on the ASAP board for a few years and was included in the kit instructions for the Masterpiece Models resin phaser kit which he mastered off of the Jein hero.

They are:

Zynolite Dark gray primer (Phaser 1)
Krylon Shadow Gray (phaser 2 body)
Rustoleum Dark Bronze metallic (handle)

The first two are tough to find.
I have used rustoleum dark gray primer and it looks great to me.
Also, there’s a Dark Gray you can get at The Home Depot in the “Painter’s Touch” line of paints.
This is just a hint lighter than the Shadow Gray but looks great anyway.

Hope this helps….


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

sambob said:


> I doubt my two cents will end the debate but, here go's
> 1) Exact color will forever be a lost cause, unless someone can provide numbers off the paint can used to paint the original props.
> 
> 2)In my mind until someone takes DIRECT molds off an exsiting original prop from the show and makes castings from that, anything else will always be someones Interpitation of the Information availible no matter how genuine the source.


In which case, you'll end up getting comments along the lines of "what a piece of crap!"

I think it all boils down to what you're after.

Do you want a nice looking prop with all the bells and whistles that won't induce a cardiac arrest if it drops? Get an AA version. Wanna put it together yourself? Get one of those 23rd Century kits, or if you're inspending a lot more money for better details, hike on over to roddenberry.com

But if you're looking for something like a museum reproduction of the _actual_ prop, like for a documentary or demonstration at a con or something, might as well give Long's efforts a looksee. You'll probably get an accurate reproduction, warts and all.

So it really all boils down to how you feel about warts.


----------



## sambob (Apr 3, 2006)

Can the 23rd Century kits still be had, and from where?? and don't say EVIL-bay!!
I'm sure there would be a market for a ORIGINAL cast from a actual exsiting prop even with warts.


----------



## KUROK (Feb 2, 2004)

sambob said:


> Can the 23rd Century kits still be had, and from where?? and don't say EVIL-bay!!
> I'm sure there would be a market for a ORIGINAL cast from a actual exsiting prop even with warts.


Send me a PM. I've got a couple extra.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

A couple extra 23C kits, or a couple extra original props?


----------



## KUROK (Feb 2, 2004)

Captain April said:


> A couple extra 23C kits, or a couple extra original props?



Original props would be nice, but no, couple extra 23C kits.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

Now, are you offering to make a casting of one of those spare kits, or are you indicating that you're willing to part with one of those kits?


----------

