Various ESB Casts discussion.

I don't have a horse in this casting race whatsoever, and as a trooper and Fett fan my chief concern is a quality piece with as upstanding of a lineage as possible. If that's the MC helmet, then awesome.

With that said, this entire thing has been very confusing and I'm cool with airing this stuff out. I think there are a lot of us on here who just want our well regarded vendors and trusted admins to level with us so we can buy with confidence.

No digs intended, just what I perceive to be the avg troopers / customers perspective. We just want to buy stuff y'all lol.
 
MCR and RS props are both verified G1 helmets. Any purchase from them is a certified G2 helmet. That’s pretty amazing to have in the hobby.

Now, my conflict of interest aside, all other helmets that are available now are recasted due to a breach of trust from the MCR helmet. The Fugly is only available because permission from where that helmet originated. It’s pretty black and white.

Being as subjective as possible the MCR and RS are the helmets to get. The options for metal ears will probably make it or break it for most people but from what I’ve heard people won’t be disappointed with the MCR helmet with metal ears.
 
Machinecraft's offering.
He has a 2nd gen cast but is offering 2nd gen casts to match his ears. I infer from various posts that the basis of his casts is a 1st generation cast that is not the same as the 2nd generation cast that has then generated the unauthorised casts that resulted in the Wasteland and Minute casts, i.e. a cast he does not own, or simply a different cast.

To explain this one last time. My mould is from a 1st Generation cast. This makes the ESB-MC a 2nd Generation helmet. An early copy of the ESB-MC is what was recast and turned into the recasts you mention. How many times it was recast before it ended up in the hands of others is unknown. I do not 'have' a 2nd Gen cast. My mould produces 2nd Gen casts. You do not have to infer anything, if it is stated that an offering is a true 2nd Generation cast, that can only come from a 1st Generation cast.
 
As a newbie all this vitriol is all pretty exhausting, but it is important especially when talking about lineage, origins, and property rights. Money, of course, only complicates the matter, as it always does. I find that the more transparency and openness in these matters are better for folks like me. But that is just a newbie's perspective, nothing more. I'm grateful for an assortment of amazing products from many kind and gracious people who accommodate the legion on questions I've had the past few months. You know who you are.

Speaking of which, perhaps most important of all for me is where on earth did the name "fugly" come from? I mean I'm familiar with the term in an urban dictionary sorta way, but why apply that to what looks to my eyes to be a fantastic bucket? :unsure:
 
6BDBDA77-4B1A-41E5-AA10-C37F28852907.png
 
The helmet you have listed as a Gen 1 EFX is a picture of the ESB-MC. The pictures in the ESB-MC thread are of the actual Gen 2 cast, not the Gen 1 parent helmet. I appreciate the compliment though ;)

I have no problem saying your helmet is beautiful Dakota. Same goes for your ears. Do you have a photo of the G1 you’re willing to put on the chart or would you rather keep it private?
 
great to have a little of an overview. When you incorporate the already mentioned improvements to the picture, could you also reporganize the "flow" of the chart? right now it is a little confusing to the untrained eye what originates from what. E.g. in the chart it looks like the ESB-MC and the RS helmet originate from the copies of Dakotas G1. Slightly exaggregated, but you get my point :)
 
great to have a little of an overview. When you incorporate the already mentioned improvements to the picture, could you also reporganize the "flow" of the chart? right now it is a little confusing to the untrained eye what originates from what. E.g. in the chart it looks like the ESB-MC and the RS helmet originate from the copies of Dakotas G1. Slightly exaggregated, but you get my point :)

The strangest flow ever made lol :lol:

6BDBDA77-4B1A-41E5-AA10-C37F28852907 (1).png
 
Last edited:
I cleaned up the graphic to my best understanding. I think the origin of the helmets is a litte more clearly portrayed now.

@Anyone of the people with more insight: is there something misrepsresented? Anything that needs changing?

(also... bear in mind that my graphics-skills are somewhat lacking.)
1592905122001.png
 
To explain this one last time. My mould is from a 1st Generation cast. This makes the ESB-MC a 2nd Generation helmet. An early copy of the ESB-MC is what was recast and turned into the recasts you mention. How many times it was recast before it ended up in the hands of others is unknown. I do not 'have' a 2nd Gen cast. My mould produces 2nd Gen casts. You do not have to infer anything, if it is stated that an offering is a true 2nd Generation cast, that can only come from a 1st Generation cast.
You make it sound like I am a witless infant. Had this been explained in these terms before there would be no confusion. I have tried to follow these events I do not think an explanation as plain as this had previously been given but thank you for now doing so.

So, to clarify; do you have a first generation cast? Or, is your earliest reference the mould that produces the second generation casts, which of course would have to have come from a first generation cast?
Again, the way your response is worded allows for an inference. The inference being that you are producing casts from a mould of someone else's helmet.

I think it's pretty clear that the most desirable cast will be the ones that are closest to the source, which would be your second generation casts and the second generation casts of RS.
 
Ok, I didn't think about that possibility. So you're suggesting (or asking) that MC maybe doesn't have a 1st gen cast, but only a mould of a 1st gen cast (a cast owned by another person). That would change the above chart a little bit.
 
This thread is more than 3 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top