# Phantom of the opera.....eyebrows?



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

When I painted my Phantom of the Opera kits (Both Monogram and the later Polar Lights) I wanted to make them look like Lon Chaney SR. 

One thing I noticed from the 1925 film was that the Phantom had no eyebrows. 

Here is a picture of my phantoms. 

The first is the Aurora / Monogram kit : 










The second is the Polar Lights kit : 










(Not painted eyebrows...just a shadow from a low light folks!)

And here is a picture of Lon SR in make-up from the Lon Chaney web site : 










All of these guy's wonderful models have eyebrows : http://www.flatdb.com/cgi-bin/ftcedgedya.pl

Question is : Did I miss something, or am I right on the money by leaving them out?

Let me know.

Mad Cap


----------



## Frankie Boy (Feb 28, 2002)

I've always disliked the eyebrows on the Phantom, especially since they're so thick and heavy. 
But it's hard to tell from your photo what you've actually done there because the Phantom's face is rather overexposed from the light shining on it. So, Did you just not paint them at all, or did you sand them down a bit?

It also looks like you have his suit a deep burgundy, or is that just the effect from the light on it?

Thanks


----------



## Night-Owl (Mar 17, 2000)

There was a thread on this subject a while back and the answer is; yes he does have eye brows. Usually the circles around his eyes are so dark and the brows are a bit on the fine side that the brows are hard to see in most photos. Also the Aurora phantom is based more on Cagney than Chaney. I did the brows on my PL phantom with replacement head:

http://www.geocities.com/midnightman_12/PLphantom2.jpg


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

Based on the photos I've seen, it seems Chaney used his basecoat of makeup to lighten and block out his eyebrows, then blended them into the dark shading around his eyes to further camouflage them. Either way, his eyebrows should _not_ be blatantly obvious; Night-Owl's build-up is pretty much dead-on. What's really missing from your kits is that dark shading around his eyes, not eyebrows.

I sure wish I'd known about Diceman's replacement head when it was still available--it's soooo much better than the kit's head.


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

*Two Chaney Phantoms*

I did my PL Phantom with the brows there, but pretty much blending in with the eye shading, and my Horizon Sci-Fi-Art vinyl Phantom with heavy eyebrows. I personally prefer the heavy ones on the Horizon model.
I just posted the Horizon one in MY Gallery on this board for comparison. The pix aren't great as I still haven't mastered the new digicam yet and the old pix are worse, but I'll get to it someday.
Dabbler


----------



## Zorro (Jun 22, 1999)

Don Post didn't give him no eyebrows.

http://thegalleryofmonstertoys.com/60swing/donpostphantom.html


----------



## Frankie Boy (Feb 28, 2002)

Zorro: That looks interesting. It looks like in its unpainted state, the model would have eyebrows to be painted but Mr. Post just blended them with paint into the surrounding skin. I wonder if that's what MadCap Romanian did, because I can't quite tell, at least on the PL Phantom.


----------



## ChrisW (Jan 1, 1970)

Zorro said:


> Don Post didn't give him no eyebrows.
> 
> http://thegalleryofmonstertoys.com/60swing/donpostphantom.html


Isn't that Irene Ryan as "Granny" ?


----------



## beck (Oct 22, 2003)

he shouldn't have gone to sleep under that sun lamp ! 
hb


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

> What's really missing from your kits is that dark shading around his eyes, not eyebrows.


Yeah, I didn't want to go that way because I didn't want my phantoms to look like the "Tammy Faye Baker" of the opera.  

Seriously, I try and avoid "Forced shadow" paint jobs because when you get into certian lighting effects, the forced shadow no longer works. 

Also, I followed the look of the phantom from one of the articles in Amazing Figure Modler magazine in which someone repainted the 1:1 scale Phantom bust without the heavy eye shadow. (My mag is buried in the basement somewhere. Can't remeber the issue #)



> It's hard to tell from your photo what you've actually done there because the Phantom's face is rather overexposed from the light shining on it....It also looks like you have his suit a deep burgundy, or is that just the effect from the light on it?


When I did the lighting for this model, I set up the camera on a tripod in the basement on a dark winter night. I turned off all the lights and shone a mini flashlight right on the Phantom's face. Unfortunatly, the bulb in the mini flashlight is a yellow (Common) bulb and it changed some of the colour of the paint. 

The phantom's suit is flat black with a metallic green bow. (To look like crushed velvet) The face got washed out a bit because the yellow light reflected off the pale flesh tones.

There are no eyebrows on either model. 

I am still using my Ashai Pentax Spotmatic 35mm camera to take my model pictures and I am also having to remember all the lessons I learned in old photography classes from the late 1980's and earily 1990's. Some of them don't translate too well with a scanner either.


----------



## ChrisW (Jan 1, 1970)

MCR - If you look at my cover art you can see the suggestion of eyebrows - I painted them, faintly, just along the darkened area of the eye sockets. I think eyebrows add to the wide-eyed nature of the phantom, but just keep them understated.


----------



## Frankie Boy (Feb 28, 2002)

MadCap Romanian:

"There are no eyebrows on either model."

Yes, but I wanted to know if you sanded them down at all or just didn't paint them in - on the Aurora repop specifically.

Thanks


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

Sorry dude, I missed that point. I simply didn't paint them on, but they are still physically there. I didn't sand them off.


----------



## Frankie Boy (Feb 28, 2002)

Thanks.

Slightly off topic, but I've also had the same problem with the hair on the chest and hands of the Hunchback. Most people seem to paint it in so that it reminds me of Austin Powers' comic chest hair "mat". Just ridiculous.

But I have observed three different treatments over the years that appealled to me more than the standard fair. 
One was simply not to paint the chest and hand hair at all (ala the Madcap Romanian's treatment of the Phantom's eyebrows). The artist just let the "topography" of the plastic suggest the presence of hair. It was good but the least satisfactory of the three. 
In the second example, the artist ever so slightly dry brushed the hair on the chest and hands, just hitting the ridges with a color somewhat darker (with a distinctive red-brown tint) than the surrounding skin. The result was pretty good. 
The third example appealed to me the most. It looked like the artist first gave a very light wash to the chest and hand hair area which provided a subtle dark background to the dry brushing that followed. The dry brushing was much in the same vien as with the second example, but with the wash in place, the chest and hand hair looked thicker but without looking at all like the aforementioned Austin Power's mat. It was quite effective.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

Somewhere around here I have a Gene Simmons mini-bust produced by McFarlane Toys. For his chest hair, which is molded into the bust, they gave it a wash in black then wiped the wash from the high points, leaving only the deepest recesses painted. Until you get a close look at it, it's a very realistic effect.


----------



## Frankie Boy (Feb 28, 2002)

I'd like to see a picture of that, if anyone has one lying around.


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

Me too as I might do the paint job on the Hunchback next.

Also, I am going to try and get some newer photos of the Phantom as I just finished the Aurora / Monogram Luminators kit.


----------



## Mark McGovern (Apr 25, 1999)

*My Cent's Worth:*

First and foremost - the correct Phantom's eyebrows/Hunchback's chest hair are the ones you think look best on _your _model. 

I painted my Aurora reissue Phantom's eyebrows white to match his hair, as I was going with the James Cagney look. Had I wanted to delete the eyebrows, I'd have sanded them a little; they could just about pass for wrinkled brows that way. I argee with the assessment that Lon Chaney did not cover his eyebrows but merely de-emphasized them with greasepaint.

BTW, I have no problem with the idea of painting shadows on smaller scale figure kits. The contours of the face need to be exaggerated with paint just as a stage actor must empahsizes his facial features with greasepaint. Remember that in 1/8 scale, a model held even one foot away appears the way a normal person's would at an eight foot distance. And most room lighting is flat enough to wash away the contours, which makes it all the more desireable to "force" the contours with highlights and shadows. In the Phantom's case, the dark circles under his eyes could very well be part of his deformities, not just a question of shading (come by right after I get up in the morning and you'll see how bad those circles can get  )

As for Quasimodo's chest hair, one thing even really good model builders seem to miss is how to get a natural-looking hairline. In most cases, real hair gradually blends into the skin. The hair gets progressively thinner and lighter, so that it merges quite subtly into the flesh (the exception would be people with thick, dark hair, or those who have set their hairline by shaving it). And body hair is often lighter than head hair, although again there are also exceptions.

I generally paint the flesh areas of a figure first, carrying the darker flesh tones well beyond the hairline. Then when I'm painting the hair, I merge the darkest hair color into the dark flesh colors so they meet at a point in the hair just beyond the hairline - no more than 1/16 inch on a 1/8 scale figue. As I drybrush the lighter colors of the hair I save the lightest tones for the hairline, which gives a pretty natural effect. Of course, hair that is hanging over the skin - the Karloff Frankenstein Monster's bangs or the locks on the sides of the Phantom's face, for example - will have hard edges.

You can see how I dealt with some different kinds of hair here: http://members.toast.net/blackswampmodelers/MarkMGallery.html


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

Hey Mark,

I remeber your models from the Scale Moddler magazines! Great Work!

Wish mine could get in there.


----------



## Frankie Boy (Feb 28, 2002)

Mark McGovern:	"First and foremost - the correct Phantom's eyebrows/Hunchback's chest hair are the ones you think look best on your model."

You're absolutely right. And that's why we have Da Vinci's "Mona Lisa" hanging in the Louvre, and the velvet oil painting copy of it being sold out of a van in an abandoned corner lot gas station. Different strokes (that's a bit of painter humour) for different folks.


----------



## fjimi (Sep 29, 2004)

Hats off Mad Cap and Night Owl! They both look great - I'm going "browless"~

Mark - Thanks for the insight and tips. Your work is phenomenal. If your work don't make folks want to go build nothing will!


----------



## Mark McGovern (Apr 25, 1999)

MadCap Romanian said:


> ...I remeber your models from the Scale Moddler magazines... Wish mine could get in there.


M.C.R., I'm sorry to have to tell you that _Modeler's Resource _has been placed "on hiatus" by its Editor/Publisher, Fred DeRuvo (our own BatFanMan). However, Fred is keeping _MR _alive on his web site: http://www.modelersresource.com/

As for getting photos of your models published, you have plenty of options. First run out and grab the latest issue of _FineScale Modeler _magazine. It has a great article on how to take digital pictures for publication. Although you may not want to get as elaborate as some folks do, the article will give you plenty of tips on how to improve your digital photography without having to go to too much trouble. It's the quality of your pictures that will be the most important factor that any editor will use to determine whether they will run your photos.

There are plenty of places to go to to get your photos published. Some are online, but I presume you're interested in print media. Many hobby magazines have "Reader Galleries", so I suggest you get hold of copies of whichever magazines you'd like to submit to, and see what they require in the way of photographs. Then apply what you got from the _FSM _article and fire away! If you run into any problems you know you can always get helpful advice from your buddies on the board.


fjimi said:


> If your work don't make folks want to go build nothing will!


 Thanks, pal - I can't think of a nicer thing that could be said about a modeler's work. And back at you all...I haven't built the Polar Lights Phantom yet but when I do, it will no longer by absolutely my own. My build will have been influenced by everyone else's that I've seen discussed on the boards.

Haven't made up my mind about the eyebrows though...


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

Does it matter if i don't have a digital camera? I prefer 35mm anyday. 

Thanx for reminding me that it's Modeler's Resource. I didn't want to run down to the basement and attack my "Rubble pile" to find one. 

I was building all my figure / car modles in the living room when my wife's parents decided to come for a visit. We did the "Quick" clean up and everything got dog piled on the model train table.


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

Hey Mark, if Moddler's Resource is not avalible, there's still Amazing Figure Modler, right?


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

I'd like to see a digital camera be able to take a picture like this without the grain or "digital black-out" experianced by most video cameras and other "Electronic" cameras:










I took this picture using 800 ASA 35mm film, with the lens set at f16, in the dark, with the model set under a black light .

I also won a photography award in grade nine.

I think I would have to look at how to photograph for magazines simply to see how they do it. 

Actually, I have a lot of old magazines going back through the years on how to photograph for model magazines. These include Fine Scale Modeler, Scale Auto Enthusiast, Car Modeler, Amazing Figure Modeler, and Modeler's Resource. I just have to read the photography articles and then look for the "white lights" to get some of the yellow look out of the pictures.


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

ThanX for the compliment Fjimi.


----------



## beck (Oct 22, 2003)

that is a real cool "spooky " effect on old Dracula , MadCap ! 
hb


----------



## Mark McGovern (Apr 25, 1999)

MadCap Romanian said:


> Hey Mark, if Moddler's Resource is not avalible, there's still Amazing Figure Modler, right?


Oh yes, M.C.R., and both _FineScale Modeler _and the International Plastic Modelers Society _Modeler's Journal _run photos of reader's works as well (you have to be an IPMS member to get the _Journal_, however).

I wasn't aware that you were using a 35mm setup. The points made in the _FSM _photography article would certainly apply to you, too. After all, digital cameras are designed to operate along similar lines with the standard ones, what with f-stops and apertures and so on. So what the editors at _FSM _say they want from a digital photo will be what you'll want to deliver in 35mm..At any rate, my own attitude toward your photography is the same as it is towards your modeling - i.e., if you're happy, I'm happy.

Of course, what we're talking about here is making the _editors_ happy...


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

Night-Owl said:


> . . . Also the Aurora phantom is based more on Cagney than Chaney.


James Cagney played the Phantom?


----------



## beck (Oct 22, 2003)

Man of a Thousand Faces . 
a biopic of Chaney Sr. starred Cagney and showed him in various films in make-up . 
hb


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

beck said:


> Man of a Thousand Faces. A biopic of Chaney Sr. starred Cagney and showed him in various films in make-up.


_Bad_ make-up. Cagney looked like Lon Chaney's "Mini-Me".  Aside from that, it's a good film...not 100% accurate, but worth seeing if you like Cagney.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050681/


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

*My mind is going. . . I can feel it. . .*

Of course! Jesus, I've only seen _Man of 1000 Faces_ about 15 times! Must be the pain medication.


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

Here's a shot of the Phantom using two extension tubes and ASA 800 film. In future attempts, I am going to use ASA 400 Black and White film as well as some 200 ASA Colour film.










Note that there is no "forced" shading on the eyes or cheek bones. These shadows are from natural light.

The "Foggy" look comes from the picture being under-exposed. Luckily, the computer was able to restore some colour into the picture.

I forgot to adjust for the lack of light that enters the camera lense from using the extension tubes.


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

This is the only photo where you can see the metallic green cape as being green and not black.

Also you'll note that I didn't get to paint the inside of the mask. It's still "Luminator's Orange". 

Now that I think of it, the orange in the inside of the mask could be painted over with a Tera-cotta brown to make it look like it was made of clay and then the front was painted with white glaze before it was fired in the kiln.










This photo shows the Phantom wearing his mask! It's interesting to note that the newer Polar Lights Phantom can't wear his mask. I know because I tried!

The mask is spray painted in high gloss off-white to represent porcelin. The hair on the mask is left in off-white to give it the feel of the faces from a Greek Era statue and/or mask.


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

BOO!


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

You know MadCap, that last photo (the close-up of the mask) looks like a still from some horror film. Great work!


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

ThanX Zombie.

I just recieved a new tri-pod for my camera for my birthday today. (MAY 26th) I also bought that FSM magazine with that article on digital Photography. 

I also re-discovered an article in FSM 1989 about how to progect images in the background and I think I'll try that in the future.


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

OK MCR, while your building models, playing with your cameras, etc., who's running the store ?

OH, and HAPPY BIRTHDAY ! :hat:


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

Hey, thanX Dabbler! 

Actually, I take the photos at night after work. However, if I need to run home to write and ad or take photos for an ad, then my wife covers for me.

As for building models, that's done at the store when there is a lag in customers walking through the door.


----------

