New Phaser and Rifle Revealed

[Psion]

I assumed the real life, production reason for the Romulan forehead appliances was to avoid having to shave a guest actor's eyebrows to make way for the upswept follicles. The rubber, instead, merely covered the real eyebrows so the performer would not look "odd" for several weeks or months afterwards waiting for his or her real brows to regrow.

I'm not so sure. I've done Vulcans/Romulans several times and I'd lightly grease the eyebrow ends, then cover them with a thin sheet of latex or silicone prepared in advance. It isn't hard to blend that and dust it so you can't see the edges. After that, some crepe or sable hair (take apart a sable brush for eyebrow-length hair that's almost perfect!), dipped in a dab of latex for 'glue' and applied a few strands at a time gives a nice upsweep. To finish, eyeshadow and highlights complete the effect. You have to get really close to see what was done, especially if you're careful to tuck the sheet under existing eyebrow hairs before setting it in place.

Of course, it's even easier if the talent doesn't mind a quick eyebrow shave!

 

[Redfern]

You really imagine they're that thoroughly ignorant of the industry they're trying to break into?

No, sir.

 

[Kor]

Reflecting upon forehead appliances, I find it a bit ironic that Michael Westmore appears on SyFy's "Face/Off" as a guest advisor, critiquing the contestants' efforts. Arguably unjust, some fans tend to mock him for simply slapping a piece of foam on an actor's brow to make the "alien of the week". I'm sure some of that was mandated by higher-ups for expediency, but most people are only aware of the final results on camera. And that does tend to shape one's perceptions. So I can imagine some of the artists thinking, "Uh, do I really want to heed the advice of this guy?!"

Since he's familiar with navigating the constraints of the industry and putting aside idealistic notions of artistic integrity in favor of professional interests, then they sure better be willing to listen to his advice.

Kor

 

[Gepard]

McFarlane Toys will be releasing a DSC phaser for $39.99 next year. Scanned off the original prop.

http://trekcore.com/blog/2017/08/mcfarlane-toys-announces-star-trek-discovery-plans-for-2018/

 

[Hugo Rune]

McFarlane Toys will be releasing a DSC phaser for $39.99 next year. Scanned off the original prop.

http://trekcore.com/blog/2017/08/mcfarlane-toys-announces-star-trek-discovery-plans-for-2018/

Very late to the game, no doubt, but I've only just looked at these props properly.

If the phaser barrel doesn't rotate around when settings are changed (Stun, Kill, Disintegrate) like switching lenses on old cameras, then I'm boycotting this shit!

Hugo - or will just be a little disappointed, maybe

 

[fireproof78]

Since he's familiar with navigating the constraints of the industry and putting aside idealistic notions of artistic integrity in favor of professional interests, then they sure better be willing to listen to his advice.

Kor

Hey, we don't want any of that talk going on. How dare they treat Star Trek like a commercial venture!

 

[cultcross]

Hey, we don't want any of that talk going on. How dare they treat Star Trek like a commercial venture!

The Gideons will be distributing free Discovery phaser toys in hotel rooms the world over. The good news is for all of us.

 

[Kor]

Very late to the game, no doubt, but I've only just looked at these props properly.

If the phaser barrel doesn't rotate around when settings are changed (Stun, Kill, Disintegrate) like switching lenses on old cameras, then I'm boycotting this shit!

Hugo - or will just be a little disappointed, maybe

That's a pretty cool camera.

Kor

 

[Hugo Rune]

Cooler than the phaser fir shur

 

[Chronos]

The design reminds me of the kind of film camera that had changeable rotating lenses. I like the look of it.

Edit: Someone already beat me to the comparison!

 

[CorporalCaptain]

McFarlane Toys will be releasing a DSC phaser for $39.99 next year. Scanned off the original prop.

http://trekcore.com/blog/2017/08/mcfarlane-toys-announces-star-trek-discovery-plans-for-2018/

I don't understand.

Scanned from the original prop? I understood that the props were reproduced for the show by 3D printer. Wouldn't I rather have something printed by the same means? If you're going to make a replica, why scan, when you can just print out like they did for the show? Or will the more authentic versions be sold for more, or maybe not at all?

Can someone help me out, here?

 

[fireproof78]

I don't understand.

Scanned from the original prop? I understood that the props were reproduced for the show by 3D printer. Wouldn't I rather have something printed by the same means? If you're going to make a replica, why scan, when you can just print out like they did for the show? Or will the more authentic versions be sold for more, or maybe not at all?

Can someone help me out, here?

Perhaps scanned by McFarlane's own methods?

 

[UssGlenn]

If you're going to make a replica, why scan, when you can just print out like they did for the show?

3D printing is not fast enough for mass production, they would have to use a more traditional process for commercial production.

 

[cultcross]

Plus there will be different requirements for the toy, such as working in electronics.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Ah! I'm getting it, I think. Thanks.

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

Not just that, there will need to be changes and compromises to the design (mostly interior) to make it mass-production friendly and rugged. More cost-effective, too.

Mark