Discussion: Biceps and Forearms

[Shikkakku]

Reserved for discussion regarding the Mandalorian Praetorian Guard Biceps and Forearms

[Ruthar]

Forearms are definitely the Shoretrooper/Tank Driver/R1 Trooper piece, so that's easy enough! I'm assuming the biceps are a new piece. Cool that they appear to have open backs, that will be splendidly comfy.

[Shikkakku]

Forearms

Agreed with Ruthar above, the forearms are most likely Rogue 1 style TK/Shoretrooper forearms.


Most compelling evidence to support this is the noticable two-layer bevelled cover slip as seen in the promo pics, as well as a count of 12 depressions on the outside forearm in between two very prominent ridges.

Cover slips are also present on the back of the forearm.


Thus I propose taking the R1-TK CRL language for this part. I also think the parts referring to flexibility can be removed, as we don’t really see these pieces flex (even though they probably could) and that a line referring to the specific number of depressions on the outside be added.

Proposed CRL text: (changes in red)

Forearm Armor

• The front strip is bevelled and approximately 1/8” thick that does not extend beyond the bicep, and has a smaller cover strip layered thereon.
  (REMOVED) OPTIONAL Level two certification (if applicable):
  (REMOVED)OPTIONAL Level three certification (if applicable):
• Forearms are loosely held closed in the back with elastic, shock cord (bungee cord) or (removed)white Velcro (REMOVED) and are designed to remain flexible.
• Cover strips will cover both the top and bottom joints.
• The outside middle of both forearms have a “rail” detail consisting of 12 recessed rectangles in between two raised ridges on both sides.

Note that a frame-by-frame analysis during Episode 7 Paz fight shows that the back has a seam that should really be covered by the cover slip, but can be seen open. I think this can be chalked up to costume malfunction during choreo as its not really seen on other guards.

[andyman97]

The only question about the proposed text I have pertains to the closures/attachment methods. For an ROTK where there may have been direct information by FISD on how the costume was assembled, for a level 2/3 submission, that would make sense but for basic approval, should a closure method be listed if it isn't visible or specifically known? After all, this was a different costuming team than the sequel trilogy/R1, there's no guarantee that everything was done exactly the same.

Would it make more sense to just stipulate that whatever closure method is used is either not visible or does not contrast with the armor? Without direct knowledge of how this costume was constructed, I don't see the rationale in specifying the required material used. I would also say, from a GML perspective, I wouldn't be looking at any non-visible closure method for basic anyway, just making sure that there isn't a contrasting closure that is visible/sticking out.

I would propose something along the lines of:
Forearms are loosely held closed in the back. Any closure method used does not contrast with the color of the armor and is not visible.

Another possible option would be to keep it as-is but sub in black Velcro for white and allow for other/similar non-contrasting, non-visible closure methods.

[Shikkakku]

The only question about the proposed text I have pertains to the closures/attachment methods. For an ROTK where there may have been direct information by FISD on how the costume was assembled, for a level 2/3 submission, that would make sense but for basic approval, should a closure method be listed if it isn't visible or specifically known? After all, this was a different costuming team than the sequel trilogy/R1, there's no guarantee that everything was done exactly the same.

Would it make more sense to just stipulate that whatever closure method is used is either not visible or does not contrast with the armor? Without direct knowledge of how this costume was constructed, I don't see the rationale in specifying the required material used. I would also say, from a GML perspective, I wouldn't be looking at any non-visible closure method for basic anyway, just making sure that there isn't a contrasting closure that is visible/sticking out.

I would propose something along the lines of:
Forearms are loosely held closed in the back. Any closure method used does not contrast with the color of the armor and is not visible.

Another possible option would be to keep it as-is but sub in black Velcro for white and allow for other/similar non-contrasting, non-visible closure methods.

Good point, I like your first suggestion, proposal amended with your first suggestion.

Forearm Armor

• ...
• Forearms are loosely held closed in the back (REMOVED) with elastic, shock cord (bungee cord) or white Velcro and are designed to remain flexible. (ADDED) Any closure method used does not contrast with the color of the armor and is not visible.
• ...

[Shikkakku]

Also we really haven’t discussed the biceps. We know the basic structure:.

• It isn’t closed- rather the solid parts only cover the front, outside and back. The inner surface is closed by fabric which looks like the same material as the undersuit, or at least the same colour.
  
  
• Also as seen above, the bicep has an angle on the inner edges and doesn’t go straight up.
• The bottom edge is also not flat, rather it curves down in a way that the lowest point is in the outside-middle, below the rectangle detail.
  
  
• There are two grooves a few inches apart on the outside of the bicep. Both grooves go all the way around the solid part of the bicep.
  
  1. The bottom groove is a few inches or two above the bottom edge and has a small “bump” up in at middle
  2. The top groove is flat and intersects the rectangle greeblie.
• There is a rectangle detail on the outside of the bicep that has a sloped bottom and goes from the top of the bicep to a little bit past the top groove.
  

Thus I propose the following (Ed. note: my brain is melting out my ears from a long week so this will have to be re-written for clarity, I would think):

Biceps

• Biceps enclose the upper arm from the front, outside and back. The inside is open and has a piece of fabric the same material as the undersuit spanning it.
• The bottom edge is not flat, rather it is slightly curved with the lowest point at the midpoint of the outside aspect.
• The inner edges of the bicep are angled outwards from the middle to the top.
• There are two grooves present running around the solid parts of the bicep. The bottom groove has a circular section that rises towards the top of the bicep. The top groove is flat and intersects the rectangle detail.
• A raised rectangle detail is present on the outside aspect. This detail starts at the top and ends just below the top groove. The bottom edge of this detail is sloped.

[Rottie]

The only argument I would have with the center part going all the way up is 1) it’s not 100% clear
2) if it did go all the way up it would hold the should bell out way more then it does now

Sorry for jumping in late

[Shikkakku]

The only argument I would have with the center part going all the way up is 1) it’s not 100% clear
2) if it did go all the way up it would hold the should bell out way more then it does now

Sorry for jumping in late

It's definitely not 100% clear, and this is why I've been saying from the start that we need some better references for some pieces....but that's beside the point.
I've talked to a member of the costume team who built the screen-used kit and they confirm that the rectangle goes all the way up, so I tried to make sure that is at least somewhat supported by screencaps, as shown above. It shouldnt interfere with the shoulder bell as its relatively thin.