PDA

View Full Version : Butterfield Jacket-Wested Replicas Discussion



crismans
10-20-2010, 01:51 PM
I'd love to get a look at the stunt Raiders jacket (but is the Butterfield auction jacket we've seen pics of whose providence is somewhat in doubt?).

neutronbomb
10-20-2010, 06:52 PM
Is the jacket on the right the one you mention below as #3. This looks like a match to a Wested Replica rather than the jackets we see on film.
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/raidersbutterfield.jpg




I posted a photo of my shirt yes. Mine is not the Noel Howard shirt. Mine was purchased from the Western Costumes Butterfields & Butterfields auction in the mid 1990's. Western Costumes had auction off their "Star Lock-up Collection." In that auction included some pieces from Indy:

1. LC Hat
2. Raiders Shirt
3. Stunt Raiders jacket
4. TOD Satchel

neutronbomb
10-20-2010, 07:25 PM
Have you seen this jacket in person. Because the rounded pocket bottoms are a hallmark of one of the versions wested put out for it's replicas. Also if I'm remembering correctly the strap attachments also. Notice the angle on the pockets back far edge and how it matches the replicas.

neutronbomb
10-20-2010, 07:47 PM
Great stuff. It's hard to imagine that the rounded pocket bottom corners are from actual 1980 Raiders production jackets. Do you remember if the yoke seam is aligned with the arm seams or if they are offset.

neutronbomb
10-20-2010, 08:26 PM
Here's what's been credited as a 1987 Wested/Leather Concessionaires Replica:
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/prewested3.jpg

Rounded bottom pocket corners
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/prewested1.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/prewested4.jpg

The arm sleeve seam is offset to the yoke seam. Also the strap attachments with the x-boxes.
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/prewested6.jpg

Here's a different one where the back pocket strap attachment is different and the Yoke seam and Arm Sleeve seam are aligned. Notice the yoke is a smaller yoke like the first jacket I pictured just with the seams aligned vs offset. The stunt jacket we see in the film has a much wider yoke.
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/Jacket001.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/Jacket002.jpg

Here's one of the jackets in USWings possession. Notice the rounded bottom corners of the pocket. A match for a Wested Replica:
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/2831307594_463f01bf6b.jpg

Look how similar the jacket in US Wings possession looks to the Wested replica down below. Like from the same batch of leather:
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/100_2331.jpg

Here's a Wested Replica next to the Butterfields. Rounded bottom pocket corners and all. Far right is one of the jackets from the film.
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/l_b5ae56e509464f34a68fe36605736032.jpg

Here's an early Wested. Look at the strap attachments. Yet a third variation of the back strap attachment. Is this how the Butterfields looks like? Also the lined up yoke seam to arm sleeve seam.
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/earlywested.jpg

Here's what's been credited as a 1993 Wested. Same basic setup as the photo right above. Is this how the Butterfields jacket looks??
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/jacket02.jpg

The problem is that the butterfields not only has the rounded bottom pocket corners, but it exactly matches the angled part on the back corner like I posted earlier and have reposted the photo below which makes it appear to exactly match just one of the many variations of this type of Wested's jacket replica setup themes.
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/raidersbutterfield.jpg

Kt Templar
10-20-2010, 08:37 PM
NB: One error there, the one you labelled as the Kurtz is actually the one in US Wings' possession.

neutronbomb
10-20-2010, 08:39 PM
good catch. will fix. I'll try and find the Kurtz.

Kt Templar
10-20-2010, 08:40 PM
But you make a good point. It's very similar to the Concessionaires. :angel:

neutronbomb
10-20-2010, 08:41 PM
Here we go. The front strap attachment. None of the jackets we see on film or in the behind the scenes show this. But many, many, many Wested Replicas do.
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/l_66cf06bf28ab49aebf46308692b5d1df.jpg

neutronbomb
10-20-2010, 08:42 PM
LOL. So which came first the chicken or the.......



But you make a good point. It's very similar to the Concessionaires. :angel:

RCSignals
10-20-2010, 08:57 PM
Was that Butterfield's auction jacket not the 'Kurtz'?

There are other more detailed photos of the 'Kurtz', showing a cloth collar stand. It's often said to be a Last Crusade beecause of the distressing style, but by pattern of the jacket is not a Last Crusade.

The 'Kurtz' was on display last year at the California Museum, labeled again incorrectly, this time as a KOTCS. It is apparently owned by Paul Allen.

Coincidently there was also a KOTCS jacket, incorrectly labeled as a Last Crusade. Tony Nowak saw it on display and confirmed it was one he made for the movie. It was apparently still owned by LFL

neutronbomb
10-20-2010, 09:17 PM
Here's the "Kurtz". I feel sorry for the poor SOB who bought this. It seems as clear as clear can be that it matches a Wested Raiders Replica like the ones I posted earlier. Then snaps were added and LC distressing and said to be an LC jacket. Clearly it cannot be. Cloth collar stand even. And the Butterfields looks a lot like it too from what we can see. Again, the rounded bottom corners of the pockets stand out. The leather of the butterfields and the one in US Wings position even looks the same.
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_1.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_2.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_3.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_4.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_5.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_6.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_7.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_8.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_9.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_10.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/Kurtz_11.jpg

Here's the Butterfields again:
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/raidersbutterfield-1.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/l_b5ae56e509464f34a68fe36605736032-1.jpg

vs kurtz. It's unbelievable really.
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_2.jpg

crismans
10-20-2010, 11:25 PM
Yeah, I feel sorry for the buyer of the Kurtz jacket as well. To me (allowing I have been wrong before--a few times, in fact), it looks just like one of Wested's versions of the jacket, done up LC style. If I'm not mistaken, it was sold not long after LC, so it's very possible that's the reason for the distress job. Not saying the auction house was trying to be misleading, but someone, somewhere, was playing fast and loose with this one.

I have thought for a long time that the Butterfield jacket was just another Wested replica passed off as the real deal so this new info is intriguing. Of course, if I remember right (and this is reaching far back into the memory banks), wasn't the Kurtz jacket said to be Grace's jacket. Not sure if that's right though. However, it seems that every jacket has been linked with Grace in some fashion or another. :rolleyes: ;)

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 12:22 AM
Let me play devil's advocate for a minute.

Throughout the entire movie the jackets appear to be consistent. It doesn't look like there were any alterations made to them. Frame by frame all the features look the same. What would we need to actually determine what alterations were done by wardrobe if any were. The costumer's continuity book?? have you seen anything that lists the fixes and alterations.

None of the jackets on film look anything like the butterfields or kurtz. However, when the butterfields and kurtz are matched up against Wested replicas they are a perfect match. Even down to how the leather looks that Wested used in its replicas.

How hard would it be to acquire the tags that were used in the Butterfields jacket? It looks like one was snagged for the Kurtz jacket. If you have access to any other photos of the butterfields it would help in getting a better look at how it matches up to different versions of the Wested replicas.

I'll be the first to admit that you are far far better equipped and experienced in dealing with the verification of authentic replicas. However, if something absolutely doesn't look anything like the prop, but the paperwork and tags are in order.......well, I'm just pointing out that anyone going frame by frame can see it doesn't match with anything that was used on screen or photos from behind the scenes and then we gather all the photos of the Wested Replica versions and the item sold looks exactly like that even down to the pockets and rounded pocket bottom edges. None of the Raiders film jackets on screen or in behind the scenes photos have pockets that even look remotely close to that. However, the pattern that Peter created and used in making his jacket replicas back in the early 90's appears to be an absolute perfect match to the butterfields. Those patterns are of course much different than his mid 80's jackets. His patterns have evolved over time and it looks like the Butterfields is a perfect match, including the leather he used, for his replicas that were circulating in the early 90's before they again changed.

What do we do in that situation. Have you come across this issue in other prop collection arenas?

I guess the question is is research into documentation and paperwork and tags and what someone says the final and absolute determination of authenticity despite whatever the item looks like. Is research into what the item looked liked all the way through the film and then verifying that the item sold matches exactly to many known replicas produced by a vendor have any merit.

Kt Templar
10-21-2010, 01:06 AM
I've posted a picture you just uploaded which shows a direct duplication of leather texture on a early Wested/Leather Concessionaires in the 'Weird pocket' thread.

Leather+Construction Technique+Pattern+Lighting and film grading. Minus the last 2 and the movement and it looks completely different. There are the scenes in the behind the scenes disc where they are filming the first meeting in the bar where it looks just like the 'Pre-Wested' because he is relaxed and the jacket is allowed to drape naturally. The very jacket with the ripples on the chest.

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 01:13 AM
Lets look at that more closely. I agree that the ripples that you posted are similar, but referring to the effect as leather texture implies it's the leather itself and not ripples caused by backing tape as you've previously suggested. I'm sorry, but features that include strap attachments and rounded pocket bottom corner edges aren't a match to anything we see on the actual film jackets. Are we mixing topics here?

I suggest if you're interested we open up another thread comparing early Wested replicas to the film jackets and behind the scenes pics. We can compare the film jackets directly against the butterfields, kurtz, and all those early westeds you mentioned if you would like.

"The very jacket with the ripples on the chest" - This is The Main Hero Jacket and lots and lots and lots of clear visuals of the pockets and strap attachments and yokes and everything are totally available that shows these features very clearly.

RCSignals
10-21-2010, 01:26 AM
Was that Butterfield's auction jacket not the 'Kurtz'?

There are other more detailed photos of the 'Kurtz', showing a cloth collar stand. It's often said to be a Last Crusade beecause of the distressing style, but by pattern of the jacket is not a Last Crusade.

The 'Kurtz' was on display last year at the California Museum, labeled again incorrectly, this time as a KOTCS. It is apparently owned by Paul Allen.

Coincidently there was also a KOTCS jacket, incorrectly labeled as a Last Crusade. Tony Nowak saw it on display and confirmed it was one he made for the movie. It was apparently still owned by LFL


The Butterfield's jacket is not the one owned by Kurtz. He purchased his jacket from Profiles In History auction several years ago. His was tagged only with the B&N label, and was listed in the auction as a jacket from LC. Also his jacket was not advertised as a stunt jacket at Profiles, and when I viewed that jacket at auction it has none of the "stunt tailoring" that the Butterfield's jacket has. The distress patterns are VERY similar, but that is only because the LC jacket distress pattern was taken from a former Raiders jacket. I think that the LC jacket went a bit too far on some, but not all of the jackets from that film. Please keep in mind that not all the jackets in the film look identical. It may be the same basic pattern but many alterations/ fixes are done throughout the filming process, thus altering the appearance of many film jackets.

Also the leather while in photos may appear the same, but the Raiders jacket had a very smooth finish as opposed to the bumpy Wested versions. The lining on the inside is black as opposed to the lining on the Westeds as well.


This brings to mind some questions.

Where in Raiders does a jacket with 'Last Crusade' style distressing occur? It should stand out, that style of distressing is distinctive.

Just what is 'stunt tailoring'?

Last Crusade jackets had black linings apparently. Where do we see a black lining show up in Raiders?
The jacket in the Butterfields auction had smooth leather or are you suggesting all Raiders jackets had smooth leather?
That infamous jacket that was 'examined' in 2000 had smooth leather? does anyone know where that jacket is now? I doubt it was the one in the Butterfields auction as that jacket appears to have been in good shape. The jacket examined in 2000 apparently was not.
Wested tends to make their reproduction jackets in smooth leather, not 'bumpy', or do you mean jackets in the movie?

Gunslinger
10-21-2010, 02:33 AM
To me I think it all clearly adds up to being either a fake or saw basically zero screen time. Even the latter seems unlikely given the numerous discrepancies. My money is on it being, at best, a Last Crusade leftover that has had the tags switched or something went wrong in inventory.

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 02:57 AM
If I saw either the butterfields or Kurtz on ebay I wouldn't even think twice about them being just plain old Wested Raiders replicas from a specific period of time when Wested was putting out that model of Raiders in that leather. They look just like one of many, many fan replicas from that 90ish stretch. It's the information that Hollywood's provided that credits the butterfields jacket as to being one of the actual movie production jackets from 1980 that causes a doubletake.

Marauder
10-21-2010, 06:52 AM
Should this thread be split into two discussions?

Kt Templar
10-21-2010, 07:44 AM
Should this thread be split into two discussions?



Yes, please! or even 3!

1) Shirt and the current auction,
2) Kurtz/Butterfields/Old Westeds,
3) and ripply pockets. :)

Neutron, nope you misunderstand me. The rippliness is from the tape. I was just pointing it out. Seeing as it was an early L. Conces. jacket it may have had a particular kind of tape as it seems quite pronounced and identical to the one in front of the temple entrance. Heck it may have been tape from the same roll.

Quick question, I've often felt that the shot with him filling the sandbag and messing about with the backpack looks like it's a soundstage. Can anyone confirm? That might change some preconceptions of timelines.

Gunslinger
10-21-2010, 07:49 AM
I firmly believe it is location, KT. Studio kicks in within the tunnel.

Unless they had some sort of crazy way of shooting where they duplicated sets unnecessarily on the stage that they are paying to fly to a farflung location to use.

...next thing some idiot will be suggesting that the whole Bantu Wind / dockside was rebuilt as a set next! 8) :D

(Agreed re the split)

Kt Templar
10-21-2010, 08:34 AM
Mmm, the lighting always seemed a bit artificial in the close-ups – especially in that little sequence. Maybe the insert shots we've been focussing on.

Gunslinger
10-21-2010, 09:43 AM
You're always going to get a bit of weirdness in that sort of location. I've produced / DoP'd film shoots in rainforests very similar, and with the canopy, you have to shove either something artificial in there (at least a 2k) or use some serious reflectors (Difficult and unlikely given the trees towards the "entrance"). In any event, it creates a vaguely unnatural look.

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 01:45 PM
I'll respect your comments though I feel you're incorrect. And here's why.

Everything you said sounds logical and sound until the item is in fact a fake. Then everything you posted above could just be retitled reasons why something is a fake. In fact, that sounds exactly like pitches I've heard from those actually selling fakes. For instance, if it just so happened that we were discussing a Tony Nowak jacket made for one of his movies and then down the road someone sells a jacket claiming it to be a production jacket from that movie and I recognize it as coming from leather he used in a subsequent batch of leather used in his replica jackets far down the road that of course would have been impossible to have been used in the production because it wouldn't have been AVAILABLE, then it IS in fact a fake. PERIOD. There is no argument because I would know the deal on that and whoever is beating their drum about being a pro and authenticator got snowed. It would be fact.

It's like this, "Western had this jacket in their possesion from 1981 to the day it was sold". This is why you believe it's real. Nothing I or anyone else says will affect you because of your belief in that statement and lack of knowing the details of vendor jackets and the film jackets.

I love the argument that because the item bought looks like a replica, then the items real because the replica is of course based off the real thing. True, up until the item is shown to be a fake and then the reason the item bought looks like a replica is because in fact the item IS a replica and not real afterall. I think the book 'Blink' is actually a pretty good read about this type of stuff. Basically when you made the statement,"I don't know much about replicas as I have never really gotten into them, but either way the Butterfields jacket is 100% authentic regardless if appears the same as Westeds version. Thier is the copy not the other way around. To compare it a replica is pointless since the replica is based on the jacket itself" it shows the absolute most basic lack of knowledge about the subject.

Everything you have described about the jacket physically matches replicas that were developed by a vendor and sold for a period of time far, far after the movie in question. I believe if you knew more about what the Raiders jacket really looked like and what all the different vendor versions looked like, you'd be acknowledging some of our points a bit more. As it is, it's a bit frustrating because in a way it's like someone telling me that all the research and documentation by the pros show this to be a Ferrari GTO when at just a glance to someone else who's very familiar with VW buses it's just another rusted out hippy mobile from the late 60's. It's like the old saying...something about if it looks like it, smells like it, feels like it, tastes like it, and squishes like it, it just really may be....... despite what the CEO of Hershey says. Dude! The leather totally gives it away.

You yourself said to avoid getting taken you have to really do your research. I would think knowing the basic details of the features of the jacket itself would qualify. I know you're going to be insulted and offended and I'm sorry for it, but I'd be embarrassed to have addressed the Kurtz subject like in your post above if you knew about the cloth stand replica jackets. It's basic.

Clearly I don't have experience with being a professional prop collector so you're not going to respect my opinion or thoughts because hey, the real thing doesn't look like what's on screen, "get a clue", "it never does". And I can't fully buy into your opinion that it's real because you lack basic knowledge about the jacket's features and what it looks like along with all the vendors replicas out there. Put the two together I guess and we have something.

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 02:47 PM
EDTIT: Hey Hollywood I see you deleted your post that this is a response to. Listen, I hope you're not so hacked off you can't enjoy your morning coffee. I'm likely the ******* on this deal. Just because we're debating and arguing about this stuff, I certainly hope you're not totally upset. I get that you have zero respect for my position. You must get sick of dealing with all us gear heads all the time.

It's cool. And your being upset and saying deb landis says it's real and everyone else does too doesn't change the fact that to many of us who totally know the things you clearly show complete and total ignorance in on a subject it's almost laughable to suggest it's real. Hey man, it's just a bit weird to hear someone who clearly demonstrates very little knowledge on the replica subject say what you're saying. I imagine you wouldn't even miss a beat if it old Joe the guy whose been making replicas for 20 years and whom everyone knows said, oh yeah I remember when that leather came out in 1992.

My point is I see where you're coming from, but it's disturbing that you put the blinders on when it comes to the very, very most basic understanding of the history of the film jackets and the replicas.

What I can tell you for a fact is every single thing you have said as your "proof" would be completely, totally, and absolutely worthless if it was simply applied to the jacket that was recently posted on ebay. Because then you would be dealing with someone who knows every single thing about that replica jacket and it would be in YOUR best interest to talk to me before you bought it for $5,000 because Bernie (an analogy) is credited with saying it's real.

See, your "verification" is all well and good until you run into the sewer (an analogy) in Peters shop that made the butterfields jacket as a fan replica. Then it becomes a sells pitch for the fake itself. There's a flip side to everything you're saying.

EDITED FOR LANGUAGE CONTENT - PLEASE TAKE NOTE

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 03:00 PM
oh boy. We've certainly had at it.


I hope we can still look at each other in the morning.

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 03:05 PM
This shows different. Volumes.






Great stuff. It's hard to imagine that the rounded pocket bottom corners are from actual 1980 Raiders production jackets. Do you remember if the yoke seam is aligned with the arm seams or if they are offset.


Umm.................. :question:








Not angry in the least. A word for you..........I am not wearing blinders, perhaps you are. I have laid out my position, and why. I have not based my opinion on replicas, and I am far from ignorant on the subject of replicas. You can have your opinion, and I will have mine. The difference between them is one has solid backing and the other is academic.

no.6
10-21-2010, 03:07 PM
I can't believe this. Incredible! Absolutely incredible! Obviously, neutronbomb's authentication skills far surpass those of Western Costumes, Berman and Nathans, Deborah Nadoolman, Butterfield's, Don Bies, well, anyone. They should just hire you to authenticate their jackets for them, because you know every single jacket made for production and they don't. I don't know what you're smoking, man! You don't know jack squat. It doesn't matter what you see in a ink blot test called a "screen grab", or what Peter Botwright made after the fact. You don't even know if two jackets were actually identical. Have you seen ANY of these jackets in person? And people wonder why collectors won't share with fans!!!!

Let's get in a DeLorean and set the clock to 1980. Here we are on the set of Raiders. Oh, look! There's the Butterfield's jacket with rounded pocket corners and a black liner! "Now how did that fake get there??!!"

Give it up. This isn't the first time someone's been surprised that something looks different on screen than it does in real life. What Peter did or Noel did after the film is completely irrelevant. If it was made for production, it was made for production. To try to authenticate a garment looking at replicas is lunacy. The only thing you can prove is that the copies made by Peter were very good early on, however he arrived at them.

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 03:18 PM
"This is not the argument. It is a reality. The Wested, and LC were copies of authentic jackets. And I will have you know that LC and Nowak were licensed to make replicas of the jackets dating back to 1984. I infact used to wear a Nowak copy when I was in Junior high, and that was in 1986-87. My mom bought it at JC Penny's."

I see where we are on this.




No.6. There's no response, but to say you're entitled to your opinion and it's worth nothing because you spewed rhetoric. I'm talking about basic, basic, basic, basic, basic, basic kindergarten stuff here.

If you decide to go on a personal attack, then do you REALLY want to do that. You are heatedly sharing an OPINION that's not shared by everyone on the subject you are speaking on and it's based on no facts or evidence given.

It's decidedly close to just being a common flamer so knock it off. Hollywood and I are debating and arguing something and for you to just jump in and start swinging is exactly how you shouldn't behave. It's ignorant. So once again, knock it off. If you have PROOF and EVIDENCE, then bring it. If you only have an opinion, then bring that to, but if you're going to jump in and try to inflame a fire that's going on between Hollywood and me and that we're dealing with, then grow the F*ck up and tone it down.

crismans
10-21-2010, 03:20 PM
Just a quick clarification, Hollywood, you're saying the Butterfield jacket was a production jacket, but not that it is necessarily seen on screen, correct?

And did you mean to say your Mom bought a Nowak replica from JCPenney?

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 03:40 PM
hollywood? dude!


I don't have a clue about those items. The jacket on the other hand..... likely around a few thousand hours. That's where my interest lies. You won't catch me harping on about other stuff because it would be irresponsible and ignorant of me to do so.

And you're wrong about Tony Nowak making a raiders jacket that you bought as a mass merchandized product in a store back in 1984. So wrong it makes me wince. See you wouldn't have made that statement if you even knew the most basic of information about him like when he made his first jacket ever. Dude, Tony was a personal friend of mine and I spent a lot of time working with him in his shop. He was a custom jacket maker. I don't even know where to start with tearing apart all the information you stated about him in your above post. And it's for this reason amongst others that I can see where you and No.6 have gone wrong in your opinion. It's depth and breadth of knowledge on one particular subject. The jacket. Especially as related to Tony Nowak.

no.6
10-21-2010, 04:09 PM
"I'm talking about basic, basic, basic, basic, basic, basic kindergarten stuff here."

Yes, that's about right.

"Hollywood and I are debating and arguing something"

Sorry to butt in on your private conversation.

"grow the heck up and tone it down."

Okay, I'll refrain from using obscenities.

You're calling Hollywood's jacket, with impeccable provenance, a fake based on nothing but the photo on a catalog cover. Obviously you're the smartest guy in the room. What, are you Carnac the Magnificent? Is that the extent of your research on this jacket? A catalog cover?

I'm not bringing evidence to the table, because I don't have any more than you do, which it to say, NONE. Hollywood, on the other hand, has plenty. I don't understand why he has any patience with you at all. You might have photos of a half dozen of the thousands of Raiders copies Peter has made, but they don't disprove his claim whatsoever. Just because someone hasn't wasted several thousand hours of "research" on the internet doesn't mean that they don't have a real production made jacket.


EDITED FOR LANGUAGE CONTENT - PLEASE DO NOT SKIP ROUND THE WORD FILTER.

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 04:13 PM
LOL. I'll tell you what. I'll wear the lipstick, but that's as far as it goes.

And there's no way I can give you an opinion on those items. Seriously. You'd do just as well with a 15 year old whose never heard of the movies.






oh boy.





We've certainly had at it. I hope we can still look at each other in the morning.


Just make sure you put the lip stick on before I see you. So when I make you kiss my butt I will have the proof. LOL!

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 04:14 PM
No. 6.

One last time.


KNOCK it off. I'm not asking. I'm telling. I will not tolerate something that's nothing but a purely personal flame attack.

no.6
10-21-2010, 04:46 PM
Sorry to step on your toes, neutronbomb. I guess the truth hurts. I guess you prefer more intellectual discourse. Okay. Let me rephrase my answers in the form of questions, like Jeopardy.

Does your jacket research extend beyond the internet and knowing Tony Nowak?

Have you personally spoken with any first-hand sources connected with the production of Raiders of the Lost Ark?

Have you ever been to Western Costumes, Berman & Nathans, or Wested Leather?

Have you ever examined any production documentation from Raiders of the Lost Ark?

Just asking in a civilized manner. Feel free to answer likewise. If you'd rather not, I'll drop the whole matter.


Cheers

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 05:29 PM
"I guess the truth hurts. I guess you prefer more intellectual discourse. Okay. Let me rephrase my answers in the form of questions, like Jeopardy"

You've clearly made an error in judgement if you think I'm going to play an obvious game.
How it's coming across is like a tag team to ridicule anything that might interfere with a con job.

@Hollywood. It makes obvious sense to point out issues that many people would see with the Butterfields and Kurtz jackets. I'm simply pointing out observations and what it looks like. You have documentation and a fervently acknowledged expertise that tell a different story. That's good stuff and ultimately, hey it ends up winning out. It would be remiss however to not point out that this has also almost to the letter been used to get people to purchase fakes for big money time and time again especially when told that any comparison to what can be visually seen from the actual time period itself for real for real is absolutely worthless. These are the words and arguments popular with scam artists. In the end, it would definitely be a benefit to the community to actually be able to show the documentation that proves the case for the community to examine because trust me people will start digging and either way there's closure, but ridiculing a simple, plain as day observation and the person who made them is an erroneous method to try and prove a point.

The personal abuse, mockery, and ridicule coming from No6 actually hurts your case. Pictures and photos have been shown that seem to point in a very clear direction to the point where examining the actual documents that prove it beyond any doubt and then allowing interested parties to start digging into it to validate it's accuracy is likely the best direction.

RCSignals
10-21-2010, 05:52 PM
I'm still intersted in the Butterfield's jacket. I'm perfectly willing ot accept it is an 'original', probably s suggested, unused stunt jacket. I say probably unused because from what little can be seen from it in the Butterfield's photo it appears to be in very fine condition. Other of the Raiders movie jackets including the one Tony Nowak was given to duplicate are reported to have been in poor condition.

Hollywood you said


Infact I am probably more aquianted with the actual manufacture of the film jackets, and their respective companies than you. Not only do I know the entire timeline of the jackets batch manufacture, I also know the shipping details, the lot/frame details. I have been in intamate contact with parties responsible for the jackets manufacture, design, and produciton. I have handled multiple authentic jackets from all the films, and infact own one myself.



Can you elaborate on some of that detail? Do you know who in fact the manufacturers were other than 'B+N and Western Costumes'? That is do you know if those companies made jackets 'in house' or contracted to other individuals/companies? If the latter who/which?

Also it has been suggested you actually own that Butterfield's jacket. I know you've said a few details of it such as it having a black lining but re there any other details of it you can provide? I ask not to try to disprove it but to learn about it.

I understand now what you meant about about 'stunt tailoring' and agree a standard jacket would require alteration for specific stunt purposes. I have offered before that some of what we see as different in the jacket Terry Leonard wears for the truck drag may be simply alterations to accommodate requirements for his stunt.

Do you have any idea why the jackets called stunt ended up so different in pattern from the Hero? (other than stunt alterations) That seems unusual as you would expect all jacket to be the same at start, Hero or Stunt before stunt alterations, allowing for differing sizes. I'm not referring to obvious changes for stunt purposes. Has anyone of the people who were there ever addressed this? Simply because of two different makers not working to exactly the same patterns?
Like screen grabs or not there are definite differences between the 'stunt' pattern jacket and the 'Hero' jacket.

Lately it has been declared by some that Peter B only made stunt jackets. It's possible of course he made both. Certainly as has been shown some of his early 'replicas' closely resemble details of the Butterfields 'stunt' jacket. tis may be because he ws given access to an original to duplicate as has been suggested in this thread or because he did in fact make originals and had at that point in time the patterns to use.

At some point I hope the other film jackets, Temple of Doom and Last Crusade especially, get some discussion time.

no.6
10-21-2010, 06:04 PM
Thanks for your answers, Hollywood, but I was directing my questions to neutronbomb.

I already had a strong hunch about what your answers would be.

Sorry if the questions are personal, but you, neutronbomb, opened that door when he stated that Hollywood couldn't know that his jacket was real because, to paraphrase, "you don't know as much as I do". That is personal. If you want to lay claim to superior knowledge about production made pieces, you should provide your credentials. I'm very curious.

I'm sorry, who are you accusing of pulling a "con job"? That's a pretty serious accusation, and a bit personal, I might add.

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 06:10 PM
Hey RCSignals,

Do you remember if KT ever said anything about Peter making jackets for the studio to be given as gifts to members of crew or VIPs? That might an avenue to explore.

RCSignals
10-21-2010, 06:16 PM
Hey RCSignals,

Do you remember if KT ever said anything about Peter making jackets for the studio to be given as gifts to members of crew or VIPs? That might an avenue to explore.


I vaguely remember something like that and think it was related to a discussion of the "Kurtz" jacket if memory serves.

Hopefully Kt will remember.

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 06:19 PM
Don't paraphrase and get off my back. Seriously, quit playing games. We're all on this board to discuss this stuff. If you are going to bring nothing to the table other than tired and worn out personal internet flaming games then leave. This website doesn't tolerate it. It is valid to to make an observation that is obvious and can be shown. To allow someone like you to then personally go after the person who brought it up is a negative to the site that will discourage others from participation and suggesting something that might run counter.

Hollywood is a big boy and handling himself fine but your actions are hurting the discussion. This isn't the kids game of prove whose got the biggest......... and I don't need to because the photos and pictures speak for themselves. Both Hollywood and I have outlined where we're coming from, but if you want to be a welcomed member here, then I strongly suggest you back up to where you were and get out of my face.



Thanks for your answers, Hollywood, but I was directing my questions to neutronbomb.

I already had a strong hunch about what your answers would be.

Sorry if the questions are personal, but you, neutronbomb, opened that door when he stated that Hollywood couldn't know that his jacket was real because, to paraphrase, "you don't know as much as I do". That is personal. If you want to lay claim to superior knowledge about production made pieces, you should provide your credentials. I'm very curious.

I'm sorry, who are you accusing of pulling a "con job"? That's a pretty serious accusation, and a bit personal, I might add.

RCSignals
10-21-2010, 06:32 PM
I understand Hollywood. If memory serves though the jackets mentioned by NB were special items meant to be 'executive' gifts, not just crew wide. They may not have even been for Raiders or at the end of production, my memory of the discussion isn't exact and I don't have access to search for it where the discussion was. As I said maybe Kt or even Peter will fill in the blanks on these.

It would be nice to know more background on that 'Kurtz' jacket though wouldn't it.

RCSignals
10-21-2010, 06:35 PM
I can not say for certain why the differences are there. I can tell you that Western claims they made the stunt jackets, and Peter claims he did. Either way the pattern that they both authenticate is the pattern seen with the rounded pockets etc.

I assume they also both claim to have made the 'Hero'?

It has been suggested recently that the Raiders 'Hero' was made by Cooper but that story has areas that need filling in too, and contradictions straightened out.

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 06:35 PM
Hollywood there's been claim that the jacket you own was Grace's personal stunt jacket did anything come your way to verify that.

Kt Templar
10-21-2010, 06:38 PM
On VIP Gifts
IIRC the gift jackets were ordered by B&N so they naturally would have had B&N labels in them.

On the Kurtz in Particular
However, the 'LC' poppers and Indy III lettering inside the Kurtz are very dodgy. It started life as a Raiders and someone tried to make it look 'LC'.

We have seen a pic of Spielberg wearing a exact Last Crusade jacket on the set of LC (Ford is in the same shot wearing an LC jacket as well). Was Spielberg's one of the production stock or was this one made for him?

Canyon
10-21-2010, 06:41 PM
Gentlemen, please can you tone this down a little.

There has already been a warning about this before and I am asking you ALL to back away. As I have stated before,
there really is no need to resort to name calling and flaming.

I really don't want to have to shut this thread down.

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 06:49 PM
Ok you've provided some awesome info. Let's see, do you mind discussing the type of authentication Deb gave. In a few interviews she's mentioned that she only received one jacket that she took to Rochelle and then she left the production.





Hollywood there's been claim that the jacket you own was Grace's personal stunt jacket did anything come your way to verify that.


Unfortunately I have no idea who may have worn the jacket, or what time of actual production use it got. It has some wear, but that is more artificial than production use. The labels do not have the name of the stunt person, just the production info, and measurments. I would love to know.

neutronbomb
10-21-2010, 07:10 PM
Is there anything you're willing to provide as far as information or just a basic description about the jacket in regards to the outside features and appendages. It's tough because you want to protect the integrity of the jacket. I understand. Even maybe pointing out which of the wested replica jackets I posted earlier it matches?

RCSignals
10-21-2010, 07:17 PM
Ok you've provided some awesome info. Let's see, do you mind discussing the type of authentication Deb gave. In a few interviews she's mentioned that she only received one jacket that she took to Rochelle and then she left the production.

I am not going to get too detailed on that, only because its important to the integrity of the jacket. Lets just say when she viewed and examined the jacket itself she reccognized specific internal pattern details, for the stunt jackets, and the process that the wardrobe team used to make the jacket "stunt safe."



As you know Deb N left the movie early, and in interviews she has alluded to there being only one 'Hero' jacket having been made which she distressed herself. That first 'Hero' jacket is assumed to be the one we refer to as the 'Bantu Wind' jacket. That jacket itself has been discussed in another thread.

Your post above makes me think the 'stunt' jackets were already made and available before she left. Would you agree?

RCSignals
10-21-2010, 07:22 PM
I am not sure that they were completed, but for certain Western was working on jackets at the time Deb left for England.

Thank you, and I agree she would have known about those jackets before she left for England. In one Interview she mentions the person at Western Costumes who made the first jacket to her design. Sometimes it gets called the 'cloth mock up'. I'd have to go back and look it up but I think it was 'Rubin'

Raider S
10-21-2010, 07:23 PM
Gentlemen, please can you tone this down a little.

There has already been a warning about this before and I am asking you ALL to back away. As I have stated before,
there really is no need to resort to name calling and flaming.

I really don't want to have to shut this thread down.


It seems everyone is respecting the moderator warning. Thank you!

Vigorously debate, argue, and don't pull any punches, but let's avoid the posts that are simply attempts at baiting. Some good info is contained here, let's not lose that.

RCSignals
10-21-2010, 07:41 PM
Yes she does say it was the only 'completed' Hero and others were in production or may have even been produced but not yet delivered to her. She wanted her staff to know they were to distress the other jackets the same as she had done.
What does appear to happen though, if the Bantu Wind jacket is in fact that 'first' (it may not be) the pattern of the jacket changes slightly.

no.6
10-21-2010, 07:49 PM
"It seems everyone is respecting the moderator warning. Thank you!

Vigorously debate, argue, and don't pull any punches, but let's avoid the posts that are simply attempts at baiting. Some good info is contained here, let's not lose that."

I agree 100%. Some very fascinating information is being uncovered. I was not playing games or baiting. Neutronbomb was ready to dismiss this jacket as a fake based on, what I considered, inconclusive evidence, and I thought that was out of line. My aim was not to make him mad, but to prove the deficiency in the sort of "fact finidng" that is common on internet forums, based on little more than photos, conjecture, and stories. My opinion. Obvioulsy NB thought his knowledge of photographs held quite a bit of authority. We disagree and you will hear nothing more from me on the subject.

I think it is absolutely cool that I am finding out informations about a totally different kind of jacket prepared for the film. I've never heard this subject before and it is fascinating. It is very enlightening regarding costume design in general and this film in particular. Is it possible that the other Raiders jackets had this kind of distressing, but it simply didn't show on film?

Also, I do remember Deb mentioning that the remaining jackets were yet to be delivered. If I recall, she was a little fuzzy on where B&N were going to get them, but it does suggest that she had set things up with B&N.

RCSignals
10-21-2010, 08:00 PM
I really don't think in depth examination of photographs, production stills and high quality 'screen grabs' can be dismissed entirely.
They are representative, and also revealed that there is at least one different entirely jacket from the 'Hero'.

One thing I still wonder about is who has that jacket that was 'examined' in 2000. Can some one shed further light on it, it's details etc. Is it the same pattern of jacket as the one that Butterfield auctioned? It has been referred to as having 'Terry Leonard' written in it. There is some discussion of it and a copy of the 'report' of it in the jacket section.
I guess that thread is the best place to discuss it.

Kt Templar
10-21-2010, 08:24 PM
Jacket 3. Top one was one of mine, bottom one someone else's.

RCSignals
10-21-2010, 08:29 PM
There is also that photo of the jacket USWings has that was apparently an unused stunt jacket taken from the production at the end of filming. It is a very smooth leather and a different pattern.

RCSignals
10-21-2010, 09:35 PM
Here is the photo.

Maybe someone has a photo of the back

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll303/RCSignals/jacket%20stuff/th_stuntjacket.jpg (http://s291.photobucket.com/albums/ll303/RCSignals/jacket%20stuff/?action=view&current=stuntjacket.jpg)

RCSignals
10-21-2010, 09:47 PM
The photo first appeared just before USWings offered their 'Blue Label' jacket which was supposed to be a copy of this jacket.
So I think the photo is a year or more old. Taken at USWings Offices?
For other details someone could contact USWings, unless someone here has seen the actual jacket.

crismans
10-21-2010, 10:33 PM
Here is the photo.

Maybe someone has a photo of the back

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll303/RCSignals/jacket%20stuff/th_stuntjacket.jpg (http://s291.photobucket.com/albums/ll303/RCSignals/jacket%20stuff/?action=view&current=stuntjacket.jpg)



There has never been a photo of the back shown to my knowledge. The Blue Label that came out from Wings a couple of years ago is supposed to be an exact copy, however. That jacket has the lower yoke and the seams aligned (if memory serves). I have a picture of the back of a Blue Label but not on this computer.

Gunslinger
10-21-2010, 11:15 PM
Just been catching up on this thread.

Given everything that has been said, I'm still of the same mindset as before - for the following reasons.

Few of the details of the jacket match jackets we can identify from the movie. To suggest watching the movie itself is worthless is just silly. It's not like they Photoshopped jacket details frame-by-frame to make them mismatch the "real" jackets. It's a tool just like anything else, and importantly it doesn't change over time (unlike people's recollections, btw). As much as some people may not want to believe it, we have identified pretty much every specific jacket in the movie that has details to spot. Those that say it's impossible to distinguish one from another just haven't clocked in the hours - its not that hard. It just takes a few heads, time and analysis.

So, given that there are points of comparison we DO know, isn't it logical that when something doesn't jive, we ask questions? It's not about being amateur or whatever. COULD this jacket have come from the production? Sure. But if it did, it simply can't have clocked in much screen time, even as a stunt jacket. Terry Leonard's jacket has been identified - and isn't the one pictured here - as has Grace's from the pit jump. None of them match the jacket in question.

With something like this it follows that obviously the burden of proof is on the owner to provide evidence that it's "real" or relevant IF they are posting with a view to convincing us. If not, it doesn't really matter then, does it?

RCSignals
10-22-2010, 12:18 AM
I'm sure Terry Leonard had more than one jacket. At least one was used specifically in the truck drag stunt. That may have been the jacket that was examined in 2000, as that jacket apparently had worn/ragged forearms.
Terry Leonard bought a KOTCS jacket from Tony Nowak. He also bought a Raiders jacket, and when he saw the Raiders jacket of Tony, Terry declared immediately it was the jacket. (not the truck drag jacket).

However it has also been said that Terry Leonard kept his jacket from Raiders, however while I have not spoken to Terry Leonard myself, I have been told by a reliable source Terry disputes that. He did not keep an jacket so could not have donated or given a jacket for auction.

Perhaps someone here has contact with Mr Leonard and can Interview him.

Gunslinger
10-22-2010, 01:34 AM
A clarification:

Note I chose my wording very carefully - I never said every jacket used has been spotted - I said "every specific jacket in the movie that has details to spot." In other words, anything not including a jacket appearing the size of a postage stamp in a darkened room if you get my drift. For ME, that untracked jacket -if there IS one- is kind of pointless to discuss for what I'm interested in, as it never contributed to the "vibe" I'm interested in.

Ditto the TL thing - sure he could have had multiple jackets, but all the shots we have seen of him in enough detail? They all match. And again, it's a mismatch to the one we're discussing.

Mate, it's all about what floats your boat.

RCSignals
10-23-2010, 01:06 AM
Here's the "Kurtz". I feel sorry for the poor SOB who bought this. It seems as clear as clear can be that it matches a Wested Raiders Replica like the ones I posted earlier. Then snaps were added and LC distressing and said to be an LC jacket. Clearly it cannot be. Cloth collar stand even. And the Butterfields looks a lot like it too from what we can see. Again, the rounded bottom corners of the pockets stand out. The leather of the butterfields and the one in US Wings position even looks the same.
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_1.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_2.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_3.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_4.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_5.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_6.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_7.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_8.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_9.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_10.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/Kurtz_11.jpg

Here's the Butterfields again:
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/raidersbutterfield-1.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/l_b5ae56e509464f34a68fe36605736032-1.jpg

vs kurtz. It's unbelievable really.
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/kurtz_2.jpg



I think this is also the Kurtz jacket

on display earlier in 2010 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQTT7tmQwCQ#ws)

jasonalun
10-23-2010, 04:12 AM
You know, I saw that jacket in person when that exhibit came to the Henry Ford Museum near my house. I even got my own personal pictures of it (wasn't supposed to take any but didn't know and no one approached me and told me to stop). It was identified in the display as being a Raiders jacket, though it didn't look like one at all. It is the "Kurtz" jacket. The distressing exactly matches that of these Kurtz jacket pics.

Here are my pics of it from the exhibit (sorry I only thought to take two - this was way before I got into jackets at all):

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/1759/dsc0080sg1.th.jpg (http://img90.imageshack.us/i/dsc0080sg1.jpg/)

http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/4777/dsc0081zn3.th.jpg (http://img403.imageshack.us/i/dsc0081zn3.jpg/)

Mac
10-23-2010, 08:17 AM
It's hard to imagine that the rounded pocket bottom corners are from actual 1980 Raiders production jackets.
Have you seen this one NB?

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c39/Mac0/Jackets/RaidersPocketCloseup.jpg

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c39/Mac0/Jackets/RaidersRoundPocket.jpg

- Mac

Gunslinger
10-23-2010, 08:33 AM
Hi Mac!

I think there's a bit of an illusion going on with that curve due to the jacket flapping open (to my eye), and the flap definitely looks sharper on the screen jacket.

Mac
10-23-2010, 09:26 AM
Kurt, it certainly could be an illusion due to the movement of the leather, camera angle, etc. However I’ve just watched that scene (the pocket close-up shot) cycling slowly one frame at a time and, as the jacket sways back and forth (in slow motion), the bottom radius is remarkably consistent. In each frame the pocket retains the “rounded” look, at least to my eyes.

It’s possible a different jacket could have been used for the close-up, as this pocket doesn’t seem to match the pocket on the opposite side when it changes back to the long shot. Ford’s face isn’t seen in the close-up, so it could be a stand-in wearing a different jacket, possibly a pickup shot filmed later.

- Mac

neutronbomb
10-23-2010, 01:43 PM
Pocket corner discussion continued here:

http://www.fortuneandglory.org/index.php?topic=691.0

Hollywood
10-23-2010, 05:24 PM
Hi Mac!

I think there's a bit of an illusion going on with that curve due to the jacket flapping open (to my eye), and the flap definitely looks sharper on the screen jacket.


This is enough already! Now it's an illusion....?? It's no illusion. You know what the problem is.....its not the jacket its YOU the gear heads who think that they know more than the creators of the costumes, and more than collectors who actually own the stuff. You all trot around these boards as if you know everything there is to know about the films, and anything associated to them because you have spent countless hours (useless hours I may add) of your lives pouring over film, and photos. Someone presents a screen grab that you are all so fond of sing for verification by the way, and then you say.........geeeee hells bells marge.......dat der be an illusion. You discount the screen grab as an illusion!! God for bid any of you are wrong about anything.

Personally I have given way too much info about Indy gear, so at this point your on your own when it comes to actual pieces from the movie. Good luck.....instead of actually learning something new, you have pissed once again on the very people who can give you the right answers. Enjoy your Patterson esq side show. And enjoy fingering your replicas, its all you will ever have.

I have taken the liberty of deleting all posts that placed so the benefit of my knowledge will not be wasted on those who love to argue and create nothing but misinformation. From day 1 on this board any statement I have made I have backed up with proof, or have at a bare minimum have present info to be check independently. It seems that you all prefer to have someone feed you horse crap, and you will continue to gobble it up, so long as it fits into your "facts". Well guess without first hand knowledge, and without actually handling the pieces you will never know. The closest hope you had of getting the right info is from the people who own the pieces. My fellow collectors warned me that going on this board was a bad move. They said that no Indy fan site is interested in the truth, they are only interested in the truth as they see it. No truer words have been spoken.

One good thing came from this thread. After a fellow collector was reading this thread he made me an offer for my jacket. I took it, and just sold the jacket. Yep that's right! So thank you. It wasn't intended but hey its a great side benefit after dealing with some of the idiots I have encountered here. You will soon see my former jacket, along with more Indy authentic pieces in a traveling exhibit in the US than you may be able to handle. Then we will see what you have to say about true Indy jackets.



See ya.

Hollywood

neutronbomb
10-23-2010, 05:52 PM
Butterfield Jacket:
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/raidersbutterfield-1.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/l_b5ae56e509464f34a68fe36605736032-1.jpg

Here are the responses from Hollywood regarding how his jacket (he claims ownership of the Butterfield jacket) looks which includes specific responses to how it compares to photos of Wested/Leather Concessionaires replicas that I've included below:

Here's what he says about this jacket that he now owns as a collector. It's the jacket in the above two photos.
1.
A description.
"It is a Raiders stunt jacket with Western's tags on the interior, and the B&N label. It does not have any interior pockets as those were not included on the stunt versions. Where you see inside pockets mine has long velcro openings to add padding on each side, and the a split in the back of the lining that is also velcro'd for adding padding. The straps look like all of the above, with no d rings. The coloring, and lining look most like the first one pictured with the black lining. Mine is a smoother leather with a satin finish."

2.
"Unfortunately I have no idea who may have worn the jacket, or what time of actual production use it got. It has some wear, but that is more artificial than production use. The labels do not have the name of the stunt person, just the production info, and measurments. I would love to know."

3.
More description.
"The jacket does have a black nylon type lining on the interior with open pockets on the inside for padding. The under arms have a solid piece of brown colored elastic so the stunt person could stretch their arms. The buckles have been removed, and the adjustment strap has been sewn to the jacket body. All the pockets are sewn shut, and the collar tips at one point were tacked to the jacket body. The leather is smooth."

4.
What he says about it's history.
The Butterfields jacket IS a Radiers stunt jacket. This jacket was part of Western Costumes "Star Collection" for years and years. There is no discrepency on that. The tags were not some how mixed up in inventory etc. When a piece of clothing is used for another film, the old tags are removed, and tossed in the trash. The new tags for the new production would be the only remnants of the clothings history. "Stunt tailoring" is when a garment appears the same as the hero but has been altered in some format to accomodate stunt needs (adding velcro, making additional holes for harness, larger size, extra padding etc etc.) Western had this jacket in their possesion from 1981 to the day it was sold.

5.
And finally in response to this picture of a jacket that US Wings has in their possession.
"Interesting. This is the first photo I have seen where the jackets leather looks similar to mine. The leather is satin, with a smoother finish, and the color is right. However the back of the pockets are not scalloped like mine. In this photo the pockets are rounded on both the front and back edges. Mine is more like the Wested/ LC pockets. Also this jacket does not seem as "fitted" as mine. Perhaps this was made in oversize which is entirely possible for a stunt jacket. I don't know.....something just does not sit right with me. Does anyone know the liner color."
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/2831307594_463f01bf6b.jpg





Are you able to point out which of these jackets your jacket matches or make note of any of the features mentioned. Also, does your jacket have the inside pocket leather facing set up like the jackets shown.

Jacket one:

black lining is this what yours looks like with it's black lining, inside pocket and pocket leather facing set up, front of strap attachment halfway between action back seam and hand warmer seam and also above the halfway point of the pockets width, arm seam is offset to the yoke seam, back strap attached a few inches onto the back panel, x boxes on strap attachments, and d-rings
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/prewested3.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/prewested1.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/prewested4.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/prewested6.jpg

Jacket two:

Inside jacket pocket leather facing set up, yoke and arm seams aligned, back strap attachment on back panel starting at edge
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/Jacket001.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/Jacket002.jpg


Jacket three:

Yoke and arm sleeve seams aligned, back strap attachment not on back panel but to inside edge of back panel, front strap attachment to seam of handwarmer at bottom and lower down. Kt please double check for me as the two pictures below are taken from different sources.
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/earlywested.jpg
http://i615.photobucket.com/albums/tt235/neutronbomb_photos/Replica%20-%20Keppler%20Prototype%20and%20early%20Westeds/l_66cf06bf28ab49aebf46308692b5d1df.jpg

crismans
10-23-2010, 06:14 PM
Don't understand this at all, Hollywood. No one has ever called you a liar or said that what you said you had, wasn't exactly what you had. What was said was that it didn't match any of the jackets that people have seen on screen, according to their opinion. If it was on screen, then you could show them where and that would be the proof, wouldn't it? If it didn't appear on screen, then you would still have a production jacket and that would be something awesome.

One thing I've learned since joining this particular hobby is not to take a single thing on face value. I did that when I first entered and have been burned multiple times. So if people are cautious (even to the point of being irritating) then you have to understand where they are coming from. To put out information and then get mad, threaten to take your toys and go home, and insult people because they are asking questions doesn't seem very "progressive". It is very much like a certain other "expert" on another board.

crismans
10-23-2010, 06:23 PM
And back to the topic at hand, I believe Hack referred to the jacket he had as a "stunt jacket" as well. Perhaps the stunt jackets had similar characteristics (maybe all of the second order were similar?)? So it is possible that the Butterfield jacket and the jacket that the Blue Label was based on were production stunt jackets. The jacket Hack had was unused and it's also possible that the Butterfield jacket was unused as well and then distressed LC style in a back room to add to the "mystique" of the jacket for auction.

And, I'm seeing a rounded pocket flap on that front pocket as well. I'm not discounting illusion, I just don't see where the illusion is coming from.

no.6
10-23-2010, 07:29 PM
Now I realise I've seen this episode of COW before - "Drum the Collector off the Message Board Because he won't Play Screen Grabs". I thought it was familiar.

Let me guess who your "outside parties" are - Patterson? Am I right? Or was it his right-hand man Michaelson?

RCSignals
10-23-2010, 09:17 PM
Now I realise I've seen this episode of COW before - "Drum the Collector off the Message Board Because he won't Play Screen Grabs". I thought it was familiar.

Let me guess who your "outside parties" are - Patterson? Am I right? Or was it his right-hand man Michaelson?


Who was 'drummed' off the board? Someone left in a huff. Someone thought they should be believed entirely blindly. Their word is the last word and how dare anyone discuss further. Someone was reacting badly and rudely to the slightest question.
Are all 'collectors' like this?

Others are only discussing a topic.

The person who has taken his toys and left sounds an awful like someone you mention above. Why is that? Maybe they'd get along better than you know.

Kt Templar
10-23-2010, 09:35 PM
I'm sure he's happy couch jumping somewhere. ;D

RCSignals
10-23-2010, 09:49 PM
Here is another discussion involving the 'Kurtz' jacket.

I only say 'Kurtz' as an identifier of the jacket.

http://filmjackets.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8

There are also photos of a Last Crusade jacket that was on display at one time in Chicago. Compare the distressing of it with the Butterfield's auction jacket distressing. Just an interesting observation.

neutronbomb
10-24-2010, 01:14 PM
So No.6. Let me just make sure I understand this correctly. You know absolutely nothing about this alternate jacket produced for this film right? It's the very first time you've heard anything about it. You don't know who Hollywood is and hearing all this new information on it is something you're just hearing for the very first time and you're completely stunned by it. It's just so awesome. Right? You're not running interference for Hollywood provide legitimacy for his claims and No.6 isn't a bogus account to help out Hollywood while disguising who you really are here residing on the boards because that's how you're presenting based on the below. Because I have to tell you it's fascinating watching the main page of who's logged on of two names that interchange with each other popping up around the same time. I just have to say I'm going to be so disappointed actually if it turns out you're that person. The methodology of the posts below and the ones from Hollywood before he so madly and desperately starting deleting them match the formula perfectly for an interference game that is so age old it's just sad and if it's true then all our members and all Indy Fans should be aware of what's going on. I'm sure something like this if this is indeed what is going on would be appreciated by everyone in having their eyes opened to something that's not on the up and up at all and possibly being done to purposefully mislead.

This is your opportunity to clear this up; any information you can provide regarding this would be more than welcome.




Now I realise I've seen this episode of COW before - "Drum the Collector off the Message Board Because he won't Play Screen Grabs". I thought it was familiar.

Let me guess who your "outside parties" are - Patterson? Am I right? Or was it his right-hand man Michaelson?




"It seems everyone is respecting the moderator warning. Thank you!

Vigorously debate, argue, and don't pull any punches, but let's avoid the posts that are simply attempts at baiting. Some good info is contained here, let's not lose that."

I agree 100%. Some very fascinating information is being uncovered. I was not playing games or baiting. Neutronbomb was ready to dismiss this jacket as a fake based on, what I considered, inconclusive evidence, and I thought that was out of line. My aim was not to make him mad, but to prove the deficiency in the sort of "fact finidng" that is common on internet forums, based on little more than photos, conjecture, and stories. My opinion. Obvioulsy NB thought his knowledge of photographs held quite a bit of authority. We disagree and you will hear nothing more from me on the subject.

I think it is absolutely cool that I am finding out informations about a totally different kind of jacket prepared for the film. I've never heard this subject before and it is fascinating. It is very enlightening regarding costume design in general and this film in particular. Is it possible that the other Raiders jackets had this kind of distressing, but it simply didn't show on film?

Also, I do remember Deb mentioning that the remaining jackets were yet to be delivered. If I recall, she was a little fuzzy on where B&N were going to get them, but it does suggest that she had set things up with B&N.




Thanks for your answers, Hollywood, but I was directing my questions to neutronbomb.

I already had a strong hunch about what your answers would be.

Sorry if the questions are personal, but you, neutronbomb, opened that door when he stated that Hollywood couldn't know that his jacket was real because, to paraphrase, "you don't know as much as I do". That is personal. If you want to lay claim to superior knowledge about production made pieces, you should provide your credentials. I'm very curious.

I'm sorry, who are you accusing of pulling a "con job"? That's a pretty serious accusation, and a bit personal, I might add.




Sorry to step on your toes, neutronbomb. I guess the truth hurts. I guess you prefer more intellectual discourse. Okay. Let me rephrase my answers in the form of questions, like Jeopardy.

Does your jacket research extend beyond the internet and knowing Tony Nowak?

Have you personally spoken with any first-hand sources connected with the production of Raiders of the Lost Ark?

Have you ever been to Western Costumes, Berman & Nathans, or Wested Leather?

Have you ever examined any production documentation from Raiders of the Lost Ark?

Just asking in a civilized manner. Feel free to answer likewise. If you'd rather not, I'll drop the whole matter.


Cheers




"I'm talking about basic, basic, basic, basic, basic, basic kindergarten stuff here."

Yes, that's about right.

"Hollywood and I are debating and arguing something"

Sorry to butt in on your private conversation.

"grow the heck up and tone it down."

Okay, I'll refrain from using obscenities.

You're calling Hollywood's jacket, with impeccable provenance, a fake based on nothing but the photo on a catalog cover. Obviously you're the smartest guy in the room. What, are you Carnac the Magnificent? Is that the extent of your research on this jacket? A catalog cover?

I'm not bringing evidence to the table, because I don't have any more than you do, which it to say, NONE. Hollywood, on the other hand, has plenty. I don't understand why he has any patience with you at all. You might have photos of a half dozen of the thousands of Raiders copies Peter has made, but they don't disprove his claim whatsoever. Just because someone hasn't wasted several thousand hours of "research" on the internet doesn't mean that they don't have a real production made jacket.


EDITED FOR LANGUAGE CONTENT - PLEASE DO NOT SKIP ROUND THE WORD FILTER.




I can't believe this. Incredible! Absolutely incredible! Obviously, neutronbomb's authentication skills far surpass those of Western Costumes, Berman and Nathans, Deborah Nadoolman, Butterfield's, Don Bies, well, anyone. They should just hire you to authenticate their jackets for them, because you know every single jacket made for production and they don't. I don't know what you're smoking, man! You don't know jack squat. It doesn't matter what you see in a ink blot test called a "screen grab", or what Peter Botwright made after the fact. You don't even know if two jackets were actually identical. Have you seen ANY of these jackets in person? And people wonder why collectors won't share with fans!!!!

Let's get in a DeLorean and set the clock to 1980. Here we are on the set of Raiders. Oh, look! There's the Butterfield's jacket with rounded pocket corners and a black liner! "Now how did that fake get there??!!"

Give it up. This isn't the first time someone's been surprised that something looks different on screen than it does in real life. What Peter did or Noel did after the film is completely irrelevant. If it was made for production, it was made for production. To try to authenticate a garment looking at replicas is lunacy. The only thing you can prove is that the copies made by Peter were very good early on, however he arrived at them.









Hi Mac!

I think there's a bit of an illusion going on with that curve due to the jacket flapping open (to my eye), and the flap definitely looks sharper on the screen jacket.


This is enough already! Now it's an illusion....?? It's no illusion. You know what the problem is.....its not the jacket its YOU the gear heads who think that they know more than the creators of the costumes, and more than collectors who actually own the stuff. You all trot around these boards as if you know everything there is to know about the films, and anything associated to them because you have spent countless hours (useless hours I may add) of your lives pouring over film, and photos. Someone presents a screen grab that you are all so fond of sing for verification by the way, and then you say.........geeeee hells bells marge.......dat der be an illusion. You discount the screen grab as an illusion!! God for bid any of you are wrong about anything.

Personally I have given way too much info about Indy gear, so at this point your on your own when it comes to actual pieces from the movie. Good luck.....instead of actually learning something new, you have pissed once again on the very people who can give you the right answers. Enjoy your Patterson esq side show. And enjoy fingering your replicas, its all you will ever have.

I have taken the liberty of deleting all posts that placed so the benefit of my knowledge will not be wasted on those who love to argue and create nothing but misinformation. From day 1 on this board any statement I have made I have backed up with proof, or have at a bare minimum have present info to be check independently. It seems that you all prefer to have someone feed you horse crap, and you will continue to gobble it up, so long as it fits into your "facts". Well guess without first hand knowledge, and without actually handling the pieces you will never know. The closest hope you had of getting the right info is from the people who own the pieces. My fellow collectors warned me that going on this board was a bad move. They said that no Indy fan site is interested in the truth, they are only interested in the truth as they see it. No truer words have been spoken.

One good thing came from this thread. After a fellow collector was reading this thread he made me an offer for my jacket. I took it, and just sold the jacket. [I got $40,000 for it!!!!!] Yep that's right! So thank you. It wasn't intended but hey its a great side benefit after dealing with some of the idiots I have encountered here. You will soon see my former jacket, along with more Indy authentic pieces in a traveling exhibit in the US than you may be able to handle. Then we will see what you have to say about true Indy jackets.



See ya.

Hollywood

crismans
10-24-2010, 03:16 PM
Obviously, some people have major trouble if they're questioned. So be it.

Back to the Butterfield, despite the reactions of those making the claims, I could see it maybe being a stunt jacket (dressed up LC style to capitalize on that movie) primarily because of it's resemblance to the alleged stunt jacket Wings brought out. Thoughts?

bigrex
10-25-2010, 07:22 AM
Man where do these nutty collectors keep coming from, NO ONE can expect to be taken at face value, of course it's nothing personal, it never is! It's just a fact of life, after the age of four, you can expect it! If I have land to sell someone in another state you don't send them photos and say, "Well, hey there bud, this is my land and I'm gonna sell it to ya because you're a nice guy"! NO! You do your research, the necessary footwork, you walk the property line, deal with a certified Realtor, determine right-away to the land, etc., etc., etc. People are entitled to opinions, this is an opinion board, please understand that this is how EVERY discussion board operates, not expecting it shows a lack of respecting people's freedom of speech. Now, outright flaming is completely something else, questioning and discussion?! That's the lifeblood of any forum, sure the jokes and fun are the icing, but you must have the cake too. ??? ;) Ok, it's 1:23 am, sorry if it shows in my tone here. :angel: :-[