Page 3 of 4

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:04 am
by PLATON
As for the front strap attachment, below is a drawing showing where the stitching is on the strap:

Image
The stretch originates at the ends of the stitch - that is the anchor point. If there were an X there, the anchor point would be an inch further back on the strap as shown below:

Image

Since most of the other stitching is not visible (the stitches along the edges of the strap, the stitches around the edges of the pockets, etc.) you shouldn't expect to see an X there. Based on where the leather pulls from, it is fairly simple to me to know where the stitch is. It might not convince any hard-core X-boxers, but it's proof to me.

I like the X-BOX, but have to admit that the above points by Todd are correct. I studied this again and again and this is my final conclusion. Todd's right.

I would really like to see such analysis and study of the other parts of the jacket, e.g. total length, collar size, storm flap width, pleat depth, back panel size etc. I will try to collect proper screen caps to help Todd.

Let's go for the ultimate screen accurate jacket.

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:01 am
by agent5
Let's go for the ultimate screen accurate jacket.
I learned that the only problem with this method of thinking is that nomatter how many screen caps you show people everyone seems to see something different. Case in point is the pic I posted in this very thread which, in my eyes shows an X-Box on the front of the jacket. I was surprised at first that there was resistance what I thought was the proof everyone was looking for and then I had to think back to my jacket specs and how that turned out. It started to make people mad. I tried to explain that these were only the 'ultimate's specs in my eyes because there were many before me who had done the same thing, just in mulitiple threads instead of under just one. The only thing I did was put all the info in one thread with screen caps to help support my homework. This started sometime in 2004 with Got Maul who is not arouond these parts so much anymore but he is also a stickler for detail. We compiled a list of screen accurate specs but left some things out which I added on my list with the pics.

Now, I'm going to put MY screen accurate list back up here for all of you to pick over and put your info up against mine. I'm not wanting to start a brawl over something as silly as screen caps or measurements but to let anyone correct anything Got Maul or myself may have overlooked. I'm sure the mods will be steadfast to take action if it get's out of hand so VP, please be respectful if you chime in.
Remember, my word is not cannon as a few of you have treated my specs (God bless you guys :notworthy: ) but are my interpritation of what I saw after looking at screen cap after screen cap and photo after photo at nothing but the jacket.


So, here they are. Light em' up boys.

Over the years the Wested jacket has undergone many design changes. Some to benefit the customer and some by the customer. What may have worked for a film jacket did not always work for everyday use, therefore many design elements were slightly altered. I wanted to catalog these changes to the best of my ability and document any recent or new discoveries that may get overlooked from time to time.
Not long after the release of the dvd's, Got Maul and I put together what we considered to be the definitive and most comprehensively detailed list of Raiders specs for the Wested jacket. Not surprisingly after we ordered jackets together did we both realize we still left out a couple small details and then left it at that.
I still keep seeing people ask ing what they should get if they want a solid, screen accurate Raiders Wested jacket? Alot of this info has been around for quite a long time but nobody was putting all the pieces together to get THE definitive Raiders jacket, even after all these years. There was always something forgotten or overlooked since alot of the info was fairly widespread. So, after doing a little more research in the archives here and even more extensive research off the dvd's an other source material, I decided to add to that original list and complete it to it's intended glory.
Over the years there has been much debate. I say, the debate is over and has been for some time. We've just never seen anyone do the research fully and present it all here. That is my intention.

Here is the list:

1. Leather- Authentic brown lambskin leather.

2. Pattern- 919 (Chris King/80's/thinner) pattern.

3. Lining- Cotton Silesia lining / body and sleeves.

4. Zipper- 5 gauge aluminum zipper with small zipper pull that extends to the bottom of the jacket.

5. Leather facing- NO leather facing on the zipper.

6. Storm Flap- 1.5 inches (3.8cm) width; ROUNDED top corner.

7. Collar stand- Leather collar stand.

8. Collar- 2.75 inches (7cm)on the tips, tapering down to 2.5 inches (6.4cm). The left collar should also extend to the midway point of the top of the storm flap, or .75 inches (1.9cm) from the edge of the flap.

9. Right Pocket- 1.5 inches (3.8cm) from the zipper seam (edge of jacket).
2 inches (5.1cm) from bottom.
Width of pocket: 6.25 inches (16cm).
Length of pocket (including pocket flap) :7.5 inches. (19.1cm).
Scalloped pocket flap.
Pocket flap length in middle o f flap, 2.75" (7cm)
Aluminum or nickel snap.

10. Left Pocket- 1 inch (2.5cm) from storm flap.
2 inches (5.1cm) from bottom.
Width of pocket: 6.25 inches (16cm).
Length of pocket(including pocket flap) :7.5 inches. (19.1cm).
&nb sp; Scalloped pocket flap.
Pocket flap length in middle of flap, 2.75" (7cm)
Aluminum or nickel snap.

11. Side Strap- Legnth : 8.75 inches (22.3cm)
Width : 1 inch (2.5cm)
Side straps sewn with X pattern AND box pattern, double stitched.

12. Side strap buckles- BLACK OR GUNMETAL rectangular 2 piece rings.

13. Side vent stitch- NO stitch holding the side vents closed.

14. Pleat depth- 1.25 inches (3.2cm).

15. Yoke seam- The arm seam should be 1 inch (2.5cm) BELOW the yoke seam.

16. Back panel- The back panel should extend all the way out to the sleeve seam.

17. Inside pocket- Left side, slit (less leather) pocket.

18. Underarm Gussets- 1 piece (small) underarm gussets, or no gussets at all.


We'll start with this pic.
Image
You can plainly see how scalloped the pockets are and you can make out the one-piece underarm gusset as well. Also, you can notice the inside slit pocket very well. Some of you may have alot more leather around your inside pockets and you need to make sure you request the slit pocket with less leather. You can also notice the pocket in the pic below as well as the well roundedness of the top of the storm flap.

Image
I noticed two distinct types of cuts on the edge the of storm flap on the Raiders jacket. Rounded and pointed. Wested only makes the top of the storm flap pointed unless you ask them to round it off. Even then, they hardly round it enough.
Image
Image
Notice below how close the collar is to the edge of the storm flap. Wested will end the collar at the storm flap seam if you do not ask them to do it the way it is in the pic below. The collar should extend to the halfway point of the top of the flap as seen in the pics.
Image
The next two pics demonstrate very well what the length of the jacket should be. Your pants should be pulled up right around the middle of the side pockets in the front and right around the midpoint of the back pockets as well. Wested does a great job at making this happen when you give them accurate height measurements. If you're slightly overweight or more (be honest :wink: ) you may want to add an extra inch or more to the front of the jacket to prevent it from riding up. This has come up in the past and the extra inches added to the front have been the solution.
Image
Image
Below you can easily see how the yoke seam is placed abo ve the arm seam and how the back panel extends all the way to the arm seam. Also notice the very narrow action pleat. On the note of action pleats, there seemed to be varrying sizes of pleats throughout the film. You can see this by doing very basic measurements right off the screen. The seem to vary between 1.25" and 1.5".
Image
Image
Below again you can see how the back panel extends to all the way to the arm seam as well as a good comparison of the width relation between the pleat and the side strap. This is also one of the best examples of the X-Box pattern on the side strap.
Image
The next pic shows a decent pic of the side strap with the X-Box stitch on the front of the strap. You can get a good look at the pockets in this pic as well as the aluminum or nickel pocket hardware.
Image
The next few images are as decent pics of the straps that are available.
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Above and below you can definitely make out the rectangular shape of the side strap buckles. Many over the years have argued that D-rings were also used but I can find NO evidence to support this. On top of that, the screen used stunt jacket that turned up had rectangular rings on them.
Image
Image
Below is the closest (yet blurry) view of the side strap buckles. You can see that even thought the side strap is not fully closed that there is still a decent ammount of leather left hanging out. This is the reason for the longer than standard length for the strap itself. We also believe that in the film the strap was turned in on itself to increase the strength of the mechanism. You can also slightly see the underarm gusset in this pic.
Image
Below is the clearest pic of any of the underarm gussets used in the film jackets. Some of the jackets did NOT have gussets, but since some did and some didn't, both versions would be screen accurate. One thing is certain to me is that it was NOT a two pice gusset, but a very small and thin, one piece a s you can see below.
Image
The last pic is of the zipper pull. All I can say about it is that the one on my Westeds is appears slightly bigger than this one. It was also said for years that the original zipper was an 8-gauge zip but both of my Westeds appear again, to have the teeth being too large. I had a jacket installed with a 5-gauge zip which is what Peter uses for the cotton Wested and it was much, much better than the 8-gauge in terms of screen accuracy.
Image




As already stated, Wested has made many changes over the years. Most of them at the request of the consumer, basically us. :D The great thing about Wested is that even though they've incorportated some changes for the better of the jacket we can still ask and receive any of the mods we ask for to brin g it as close to the sceen used jacket as possible. I wanted to reiterate what some of the design changes were, why they took place over the years and the choices that remain. These have all been explained in past post, but I thought it beneficial to host all of this info in one post.

Here goes.

1. Leather - The authentic brown was made available after the Wested jacket had been on the market for some time. Peter located the original color to source out what we now know as Authentic Brown. The leather used to be processed in a different way and as you can notice from pics, is quite a bit more grainy than what is currently available. For screen accuracy, I feel you need the thinnest and grainiest leather Wested can source. Many people comment on how light it looks comparred to what we see on the screen, but if you distress is properly, you can achieve the look as if Harrison Ford himself handed you hi s hero jacket.

2. Pattern - The original patterns that were used by leather Concessionaries to make the original Raiders of the Lost Ark jacket were refered to as the '919' pattern and were tailored to fit Fords thin frame. When Leather Concessionaries later formed Wested and began making the Indy jacket they loosened up the size of the coat so that it could fit a wider range of customers. It wasn't until Chris King discovered this in a conversation with Wested and asked for this pattern to be used on his jacket in August, 2002. Wested now offers both the standard and 919, or what is sometimes called the 'Chris King' or '80's fit' pattern.

3. Lining - Peter has stated that the entire Raiders jacket was lined with Cotton Silesia but over the years Wested began using satin as an alternative. Customers found that sometimes their arms would get hung up on the cotton in the sleeves and that the satin let the arms slide through with ease. Although not screen accurate, a cotton body with satin sleeves has become the norm.

4. Zipper - The orignal zipper was made from aluminum and broke easily. Wested began using an 8-gauge nickel zipper to get the silver color and did not extend the zipper all the way to the bottom of the jacket as it was in the film. The reason for this is if you move the zipper up a few inches from the bottom as they did, it would reduce stress and lessen the result of tearing the leather. Although the moved up zipper placement is standard, Wested will take both requests. They do not however, still use the nickel zipper. At some point there was a problem with them and they now only use brass. I always thought the 8-gauge zipper teeth looked too thick when compared what was seen on the screen and when Wested began production of the cotton Indy jacket they used a 5-gauge zipp er, which has smaller teeth and to my eye is more screen accurate. In the end if you want the real deal you want 5-gauge aluminum, but you'll have to buy it yourself and send it to Wested to have them install it. God Bless them for allowing us to do so. :tup:

5. Leather Facing - The original jacket had no leather facing along the zipper track. This is one thing that lead to the characteristic of the wavy zipper we see on the jacket in the film. Early on Wested began adding a leather facing along the zipper track because some customers complained they kept getting their zippers stuck on the lining, which was the best and smartest decision from a technical standpoint. Although the change to add the facing was considered standard, Wested would continue to take requests to leave it off.

6. Storm Flap - From years of combined research and from what Wested attested to, the width of the s torm flap has always been 1.5". One thing Wested will only do as a request is to round off the top corner of storm flap as it looked in the film on at least one of Fords hero jackets. The standard is a more squared corner, which from a professional point of view, is probably more correct.

7. Collar Stand - The original jacket most worn thoroughout the film clearly had a leather collar stand. There were some stunt jackets that definitely had a cotton collar stand but I can find no evidence that any of the hero jackets did.

8. Collar - One early complaint of the Wested was the collar. Many thought it too big, sometimes over a width of 3". You can request any size collar you like but from our collected research a size of 2.75" at the tips rounding off to 2.5" looks better on a standard sized frame. If you are a larger person you may want to go with a 3" collar or maybe slighty larger. If the rest of the jacket gets sized up the collar should to to be kept in perspective. Another important screen accurate spec that is only done by request is to make sure the left collar extends to the midpoint of the top of the storm flap as seen in the film. As standard, Wested keeps the collar fairly flush with the storm flap seam so you have to ask if you want it as it was on the original jacket.

9. Pockets - In 2002, Wested began using a standard pocket size of 8.25" by 6.75" based off of vhs caps from a customer. I've found that on an average frame these specs are much too big. At 5'10", I asked that my pockets be at a size of 7.5" by 6.25" and that seems to make a big difference. If you are over 6' tall you should most likely go with the standard pocket size Wested offers so that they are in proper perspective with a larger sized jacket. There are also more and less scalloped pocket flaps in the fil m, so thats all up to personal preference.

10. Side Strap - The original Wested strap was at a good, long length and at some point a change in the side strap hardware reduced the length of the strap. Based on years of collected research the width of the strap is considered to be 1'. Since the strap is barely seen on film and when it is it's never loose, we don't know the exact length. Later on after the discovery of the rectangular black buckles I moved the length of the strap on my jacket back to the original, 8.75" standard size length Wested made them at. Another thing to note is that with the way the side strap is configured it will face forward when put through the buckles. In order for it to be as we think it was on the film jacket was to take the leftover strap and force it back through the back buckle, thus leaving the strap facing backwards. That reinforcement makes it much tighter and much less likely to come loose.

11. Side Strap Buckle - Based on info from a screen used stunt jacket and the caps from the dvd's, it was evident that the side strap hardware were four (2 on each side) black or gunmetal gray rectangular buckles. The stunt jacket also had silver buckles painted black. That's all up to you to do that.

12. Side Vent Stitch - The side vents on the original Raiders jacket open up with ease which is one of the telling characteristics of that jacket. At some point (maybe from the start) and most likely for technical reasons, Wested began putting a stitch at the top of the vent to help keep them closed. If you want the vent to open as it di din the film, ask that they NOT stitch the side vent up.

13. Pleat Depth - The orignal pleat depth of the Raiders jacket was shallow. Because the jackets used in the film were brand new the pleats stayed flat. When yo u wear a Wested for a while, some of the pleats start to become slightly wavy. This caused Wested to deepen the pleat depth up to 3" and later adding elastic under the lining to help keep the pleats closed. I've found that there were different sizes of pleat depths on the original jacket but the two you'd want to stick with are 1.25" or 1.5", which is what my original Raiders jacket made in 1999 had and they reflect the look of the original jacket well.

14. Yoke Seam - The original jackets had the yoke seam around 1" above the arm seam as can be seen in many frames of the film. The yoke are in general appears to be smaller than in the sequel jackets but Wested will not make the yoke smaller as they've been asked to do so several times. If I recall, it had something to do with modifying the existing pattern. This would also extend the length of the back panel as well, but instead I believe what Wested does is move the ar m seam down so that it is below the yoke seam and gives it the look as in the film.

15. Back Panel - You can clearly see in any frame of Raiders where the back of the jacket is exposed that the back panel ends right at the arm seam. Early Wested jackets had the back panel ending 1" off of the arm seam, which actually helped keep the action pleats flatter. But, it didn't take long before fans asked that their jackets now come with the back panel extending all the way to the arm seam, or as close as possible, just as can be seen plainly in the film.

16. Inside Pocket - We know for a fact that there was only one, left, inside 'slit' pocket in the original Raiders jacket with a very minimal facing. At some point Wested started adding more than just the small slit of leather and added a much larger facing, which effected the drape of the jacket. Wested still does both versions of the inside p ocket and you can have more than one, but you must specify exactly what you want at the time of ordering.

17. Underarm Gussets - Some of the original Raiders jackets had underarm gussets and some didn't. I assume some of this was determined by whatever scene was being filmed and what they needed the jacket to be able to do for any particular scene, such as stunts. I can only find evidence of a 1-piece gusset being used as can be seen in the film, but some have requested a 2-piece gusset which Wested will accomodate. However, if it's film accuracy you're interested in then a small, 1-piece gusset or no gusset will do.

Lastly, here's a pic of my Wested. Still needs a bit of fine tuning, but it's my baby. 8)
Image

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:10 am
by agent5
I just thought...if someone wants to start this in another thread we can move some of the info over as to not take away anymore from Todd's jacket post.

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:12 pm
by Puppetboy
Thanks for posting that list again, Agent5. Speaking for myself, I have an open mind concerning all specs. I just have to go on the best information I have until better information becomes available. I agree with most of you list - but something about the 2" from the bottom hem to the pocket just doesn't mesh with most of the screen caps.

Oh, thanks for catching the rounded and square corners on the collar stand/storm flap! That proves that there were at least 2 hero jackets! Possibly part of the apparent discrepancies in details?

I still don't see any front strap X anywhere. All the pictures where you say it is are too blurry to make out any stitching at all, let alone a X. Mind you, SEAMS show up because they cast a shadow, but top STITCHING does not (in those photos).

The screen cap in front of the idol is interesting because it shows the piping on the inside pocket. It also shows the cotton lining to be really nice and new! After a little wear the shine goes away.

Two other specs I would modify - the back pleat should be 1.5". Less than that looks really small in person. Also, the distance from the sleeve seam and the shoulder yoke is a little less than 1" - more like .75" of even .5". Due to the angle of the sleeve seam and the placement of the top stitch, it makes it look like they are much farther apart than they really are.

A 5 gauge zip is tiny - too tiny for a jacket. If you've got one and like it, great, but I don't think you can look at those blurry screen caps and judge the gauge of the zipper. 8 gague looks right to me and is the minimum I think anyone would put on a jacket (by choice). Anyway, all I'm saying is I think it's unwise to be dogmatic on that spec.

Concerning the "X" box on the rear strap - the pic on the plane doesn't look like the square "X" box everyone's accustomed to. It's a pretty clear (though not perfect) image. It looks like the box is a rectangle and the stitch inside is a sideways "V" (or half an "X") with a stitch across it, creating a triangle. Does anyone else see that?

Regarding length - that one is troubling to me. In most scenes where Ford's arms are down (rare) the sleeves and body look very close in length. And yet, look at how long the sleeves are on his hands. Some have said Ford has long arms, but that is clearly not the case. His wrists are much closer to his waist than most. I wish someone (_) would chime in with the original measurements off of Terry Leonard's jacket - they are probably the same as Ford's. Yes, some of the details are different, but the basic shell would likely be the same.

I am after the "Ultimate screen accurate" jacket - no question. But there are some accommodations that must be made, like proportions. I have long arms and the difference between my sleeves and the jacket hem have to be greater. Also, putting cotton in the sleeves is a bad idea. Nice Acetate sleeve lining doesn't change the appearance of the jacket and sure makes it more practical.
That's one of the bridges you're going to have to cross....screen accurate but inherenting the original problems, or strength and a slight departure from screen accuracy.
My rule is that I'll improve the practicality as long as it doesn't alter the appearance.
I would really like to see such analysis and study of the other parts of the jacket, e.g. total length, collar size, storm flap width, pleat depth, back panel size etc. I will try to collect proper screen caps to help Todd.
Yeah, I'm with you! Those measurements are really hard to get from photos. - Well, come to think of it, the collar should be easy to measure by using the storm flap... Looks like it's back to photoshop! The measurements of the Terry Leonard jacket would be (possibly) enlightening on those specs. And thanks for offering to help with screen caps!

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:18 pm
by Puppetboy
Oh, yeah... the jacket in the temple is the same one in the plane scenes - rounded collar stand/stom flap, AND those stretch marks in the leather grain. Look at the pic in front of the idol. There they are running across his right shoulder.

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:40 pm
by Ark Hunter
I wonder if you asked Peter really nice if he would make an exact Harrison Ford jacket from original HF Raiders pattern and measurements. (if he still has them somewhere) NOT resized to fit you, but just like the one(s) in Raiders. No mods for integrity of the jacket, a prop jacket.

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:43 pm
by Michaelson
Puppetboy wrote:
That's one of the bridges you're going to have to cross....screen accurate but inherenting the original problems, or strength and a slight departure from screen accuracy.
My rule is that I'll improve the practicality as long as it doesn't alter the appearance.
Fair enough!

Regards! Michaelson

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:17 pm
by doc riviere
Puppetboy wrote:
Concerning the "X" box on the rear strap - the pic on the plane doesn't look like the square "X" box everyone's accustomed to. It's a pretty clear (though not perfect) image. It looks like the box is a rectangle and the stitch inside is a sideways "V" (or half an "X") with a stitch across it, creating a triangle. Does anyone else see that?

yes me too !! i never seen any X square box ...maybe my eyes

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:37 pm
by Ark Hunter
doc riviere wrote:Puppetboy wrote:
Concerning the "X" box on the rear strap - the pic on the plane doesn't look like the square "X" box everyone's accustomed to. It's a pretty clear (though not perfect) image. It looks like the box is a rectangle and the stitch inside is a sideways "V" (or half an "X") with a stitch across it, creating a triangle. Does anyone else see that?

yes me too !! i never seen any X square box ...maybe my eyes
The strap is covering part of it up, but like I said about the B&W photo, it does look like it may be rectangular and not a square box.

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 8:19 am
by PLATON
Concerning the "X" box on the rear strap - the pic on the plane doesn't look like the square "X" box everyone's accustomed to. It's a pretty clear (though not perfect) image. It looks like the box is a rectangle and the stitch inside is a sideways "V" (or half an "X") with a stitch across it, creating a triangle. Does anyone else see that?
Yes I see that too. And I have to say, I was watching the film again last night and there is some scene where it is shown that the back strap loop has enough strap behind it to accomodate a square stitch. I really don't see a reason for a rectangle stitch when there is room for a square stitch.

What I mean to say is that the Raiders jacket is not like the LC below that has only a line stitch behind the back strap loop

Image


I will find the screen cap and post it.
Anyone else agree with me?

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:20 am
by doc riviere
the only thing i can see on the raiders jacket ( pics and movie ) is the square xbox strap on the back panel but in the seam on front panel

not sure i'm clear :lol:

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:30 am
by Puppetboy
G-MANN just loaned me an Expedition jacket to examine (thanks, G-MANN!!!) and the front strap is obviously altered, but the back strap has a mish-mash of stitches that look like they've been copied from the original. Perhaps the rear strap stitching is less "orderly" than folks are used to seeing on these replicas?

The shot above where Ford is on the ground under the plane - it is very blurry, but it does faintly look like a square X on the rear strap. Again, very hard to be certain. Perhaps with some enhancement?...

On a practical note, the rear strap is only 2" long - to take up a full half of that doesn't leave much room for any other stitching. If the Expedition is a clue, then there was also a stitch near the hardware to stabilize the buckle and possibly another to anchor the whole thing through to the back panel. Maybe they made a shorter box to leave room for other stitches?

Agent5, do you have any screen caps that clearly show the zipper to extend to the bottom of the jacket? To do that requires an alteration to the basic pattern and assembly (it normally can't go lower than the turned-up hem facing behind the storm flap). If you can prove that, I'd like to incorporate that.

Note on the LC jacket the side straps look lower, too.

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:58 am
by PLATON
In the photo on the plane we see a sideways V and in the photo under the plane we see an X.

I don't think that the FS strap shown in some photo posted by me somewhere above in this thread corresponds to the real thing (i.e. what we see in the photos on and under the plane)

Will appreciate your comments.

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:03 pm
by Puppetboy
I answered my own question on the zipper. Here it is:

Image

Mine will now extend to the bottom of the jacket.

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:58 pm
by agent5
I don't think that the FS strap shown in some photo posted by me somewhere above in this thread corresponds to the real thing (i.e. what we see in the photos on and under the plane
You guys have to remember that FS and 'hero jacket' should not be used in the same sentence. The FS was taken from a STUNT jacket which we all know could have been made a mulititude of ways. We can only take some of what is on the FS at face value when looking over screen caps.

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:00 pm
by Michaelson
Dead on target. The FS was indeed based on a stunt jacket, and not one worn by Ford either, so there's a double wammy on that if you're after a 'hero jacket' for comparison.

Regard! Michaelson

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:05 pm
by Puppetboy
More pocket measurements off of the right pocket. I give you two grids just for kicks:

Image

By this one, the height of the pocket is 6.75". Now another:

Image

By this one the pocket is 7.5" high. See how easy it is to get incorrect measurements using this method? All I did was fudge the size of the grid. I took the measurement of the grid from the space between the pocket and hem. I'm assuming the space is precisely 1.5". This does prove a few things:
1. Getting measurements from photos is really tricky.
2. The pocket flap is wider than the pocket
3. The right pocket was offset 2.25" from the center! The same distance as the left pocket from the edge of the storm flap!

I think this measurement, combined with the measurements from the left pocket photos have convinced me that the pocket is 1.5" from the bottom, and about 7" - 7.5" high. The thing that would make me lean towards the 7.5" spec is that everything comes out even: 1.5" - 7.5" - 9". When marking out a pattern from scratch, a person is most likely to use round measurements off his ruler. 1.5" storm flap, 1.5" pleat, 1.5" hem, 1" straps, etc.

Comments?

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:41 pm
by Dr._J
Comments?
Yes...I want one.

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:29 pm
by independent
Image

This is a temple jacket, but you could see that the distance from pocket bottom to jacket bottom is significant longer than the width of the storm flap. Perhaps this is due to the temple jacket being longer.

However, I'm not sure if the 1.5" width storm flap is gospel truth. I think in some hero jackets, the storm flap is slightly narrower.

Also, I think some jackets have pockets placed farther from the storm flap than those of others.

I personally see the pockets slightly wider apart than how you have them on your jacket, Todd. I think they are too close together.

Also, I think the distance from pocket bottom to hem is greater than the storm flap width.

Like you said, getting the right perspective is a tricky matter. Obviously the jacket is not draping completely flat in these grid pictures. It would be tough to get a very precise measurement in this manner. I imagine the best scenario would be employing the grid lines when the jacket is zipped up or flat on his body, with the camera pointed perpendicular to the plane of his body. These are tough caps to find, but I recall one photo in which Indy is posing for a picture with Marion - straight on. (Did he have a glove stuffed in his pocket?)

I'm thinking about heading to blockbuster video and renting the trilogy just to find out more!

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:57 pm
by agent5
Perhpas some of the stunt jackets from Raiders were the Cooper jackets which they've always claimed to have made. The TOD jacket looks exactly like a Raiders stunt jacket. Smaller pockets and larger yoke. I have always heard that some Raiders stunt jackets were used in TOD but I've always assumed that they were used by stuntmen and that Ford wore the jacket made by that French company.
I think he may be wearing a Raiders stunt jacket for TOD. Maybe the French company produced them but they were never used and they went back to the Raiders jackets, which they still had some of.

Thoughts?

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:09 pm
by Indiana G
then the question is....why did they make their stunt jackets 1" longer? to avoid a nasty pink belly when rolling around on the ground?

what is with the whole 1" longer thing. its barely noticeable IMO. i've got my TOD wested inbound and i asked for an extra 1.5" length so at least i can squint my eyes and notice it.

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:12 pm
by agent5
Yeah. I've also heard HF wore his pants lower in TOD and LC, which would put the jacket in exactly the right place, which is pretty much unnoticeable as you've already pointed out.

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 5:14 pm
by Ark Hunter
Puppetboy wrote:Comments?
I think Peter would not be using inches.

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 5:30 pm
by Kt Templar
IndyDoc wrote:
Puppetboy wrote:Comments?
I think Peter would not be using inches.
Doc we still haven't gone fully metric in the UK. Peter certainly would have been using inches during the Indiana Jones films and still measures in inches now. I have hand written order receipts from him in inches! :)

However he will take orders in metric if his European customers are more comfortable with them. Tape measures and rulers here have feet and inches on one side and centimetres on the other.

Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 5:47 pm
by Ark Hunter
Hmm, oh well. I thought you'd been metric for a long time. Come back toward the light! :lol:

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:03 pm
by PLATON
By this one the pocket is 7.5" high. See how easy it is to get incorrect measurements using this method? All I did was fudge the size of the grid. I took the measurement of the grid from the space between the pocket and hem. I'm assuming the space is precisely 1.5". This does prove a few things:
1. Getting measurements from photos is really tricky.
2. The pocket flap is wider than the pocket
3. The right pocket was offset 2.25" from the center! The same distance as the left pocket from the edge of the storm flap!

I think this measurement, combined with the measurements from the left pocket photos have convinced me that the pocket is 1.5" from the bottom, and about 7" - 7.5" high. The thing that would make me lean towards the 7.5" spec is that everything comes out even: 1.5" - 7.5" - 9". When marking out a pattern from scratch, a person is most likely to use round measurements off his ruler. 1.5" storm flap, 1.5" pleat, 1.5" hem, 1" straps, etc.
I totally agree. Also the pocket flap in its center should measure 3 inches.
What about the width of the pocket?

Here's a screen cap

Image

Assuming that the strap is 1 inch (visible behind the pocket) you can make a grid and measure the width of the pocket.
Here also it seems that the pocket flap is wider than the pocket.

Also, check out this pic

Image


And to return to the subject of the strap stitch please look at the below photo.

Image

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:29 pm
by PLATON
Todd please don't forget to make the pocket flap seam like this

Image


and NOT like this

Image

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:29 pm
by Puppetboy
PLATON,

I'm glad you're seeing what I'm seeing in those pictures. As far as pocket width, it's impossible to tell from those pictures. They're great screencaps and show a lot of detail, but the camera is close, imparting a lot of distortion.

Try this: take a jacket out of your closet and hold a ruler in front of it - say 6". Try to eyeball a dimension - say the collar. You'll quickly realize that a turn of just a few degrees will totally ruin your measurement. It's nearly impossible. The only time is works is if the distance from the camera is great - 15 or 20 feet, if the subject is fairly perpendicular to the camera, and there are reference objects of a known size on the same plane (the same distance from) as the camera.

I think what you noticed about the pocket flap is important: being wider than the pocket gives the pocket a more "square" look. I think that's what threw me off a little at first.

As to the front strap stitch, what you drew makes total sense to me. I think the two jackets were slightly different. One had a little wider "box" than the other. That is the wide one.

A question: notice how far the left pocket is from the zipper - I think it is 2.25" to match the right pocket. Normally it would be 1.5" to center the pockets with the storm flap. This matches the jacket in the opening scene at the temple perfectly. Should I stick with screen accurate and put it off center, or should I change it?

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:31 pm
by Puppetboy
Todd please don't forget to make the pocket flap seam like this
But the cap you just posted shows the stitching even, like your second example.

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:36 pm
by PLATON
Image

Yes, but here is the right one. The good looking one.

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:42 pm
by PLATON
A question: notice how far the left pocket is from the zipper - I think it is 2.25" to match the right pocket. Normally it would be 1.5" to center the pockets with the storm flap. This matches the jacket in the opening scene at the temple perfectly. Should I stick with screen accurate and put it off center, or should I change it?
I think the film jacket has 3 irregularities.

One is the distance of the left pocket from the zipper (too large, the pockets will be off center when you zip the jacket).
Two is the collar that extends to the middle of the storm flap. (When you zip the jacket all the way up the collar will look really bad)
Three is that the pocket flaps are a bit larger than the pockets. (I don't see any reason for that).

Although this is a tough question, i.e. a) go 100% accurate or b) correct the irregularities, I would go with "b"

It's really good to have a 100% accurate jacket, but it's really bad to have a jacket with the pockets off center. And less bad is better.

So if I was making the jacket for people who want to wear it (and not put in on a mannequin) I would correct all three irregularities.

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 8:52 pm
by Ark Hunter
I think there's nothing wrong with the pocket flap being slightly larger. The off center pockets would be bad though and I don't know about the collar as I don't zip it up all the way.

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 9:19 pm
by agent5
Platon,
The green line in the pc above is going right through the X on the front strap. You can't see the outer edge of the box...the line to the left of your green line? Dude, it's an X.

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 9:33 pm
by GCR
PLATON wrote: Although this is a tough question, i.e. a) go 100% accurate or b) correct the irregularities
If the answer to this ain't "A", then what's the point to all of this? How can you argue about the type of stitching holding the side straps in place but then throw out other things like pocket placement and collar design? If you're gonna go for screen accurate, then do it 100%

-GCR

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 9:45 pm
by independent
^Because when some detail isn't absolutely clear or there's two or three variations, might as well go with the most practical option.

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 10:06 pm
by Ark Hunter
But those all seem to be pretty clear details.

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:43 pm
by independent
x-box stitching seems to be a disputed detail. But apparently it's more practical as it provides reinforcement for the strap.

The pocket stitching seems to clearly vary, as puppetboy mentioned. I don't know if there's any practical benefit to either variation.

Pocket placement and size seems to vary. Definitely between movies, as the pocket placement/storm flap is different on the temple jacket. In raiders, pockets can look small or large. Is there any real practical benefit of a larger or smaller pocket? Well, many people seem to prefer a smaller rather than an oversized pocket that covers half the jacket. True, some with very large hands can't fit their hands into the handwarmers, but some don't even like the handwarmers.

You can't make everybody happy.

But I'm glad agent5, who seems very knowledgeable, conscientious, and long-in-tooth regarding Indy matters, and Platon, who is very passionate, are putting in the effort to collaborate with Todd to give us consumers a more screen-accurate jacket.

Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:57 pm
by GCR
milesfides wrote:^Because when some detail isn't absolutely clear or there's two or three variations, might as well go with the most practical option.
Really, given the fact that NO ONE has examined any of the original HERO jackets and taken precise measurements, I think it's safe to say NOTHING is absolutely clear, once you get into details this specific. Perfect example, the whole "X-box" stitching or no "X-box" stitching debate that has arisen in above posts. Many pics supplied as evidence show what could be an X-box...if you squint your eyes just right. Granted, it may be an X-box, but it's just not clear enough from the available visual evidence at our disposal. Thus, I think if a detail isn't absolutely clear, a best guess is in order.

As for variations between jackets, I'd suggest picking one design and sticking with it. Just like the fedora, you can't have a jacket that looks just like Indy's does in every frame of Raiders, but you can pick a specific style and go with that (like folks do with the hats, picking an SOC version or Raven Bar, etc.) That way, it's still screen-accurate to specific points in the film, rather than being a hybrid of 2 or 3 jackets and not being screen-accurate to ANY one jacket.

And when it comes to practicality vs. screen accuracy, I guess if a certain method of construction is not reliable for a real-world, regular wear jacket, obviously the construction should be changed to allow maximum durability. (while staying as close to the original look as possible) Making a screen-accurate jacket that looks great but falls apart after a month or two is not good for anyone. However, to change things like collar design and pocket placement just because they are irregularities doesn't make sense to me. Now you're getting into the realm of changing a design simply as a matter of personal taste, rather than for functionality or durability. And once you go that road, why bother with such details as x-box or no x-box, pointed storm-flap or rounded...if you're making a jacket the way you want the jacket to be made, rather than making it the way it was, what's the point of obsessing over all these little details if you're just going to throw some of them out?

-GCR

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:36 am
by PLATON
Platon,
The green line in the pc above is going right through the X on the front strap. You can't see the outer edge of the box...the line to the left of your green line? Dude, it's an X.
With that pic I was not referring to the strap stitch.
I was referring to the seam of the pocket flap.
Agent5 please read a few posts above to see what I mean.

Personally, I don't doubt there is an x-box. The question is whether the x-box is square or rectangular. I like the square one.

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:59 am
by PLATON
To: TODD - VERY IMPORTANT -

I have been making some thoughts regarding the pockets being off center.
I don't think they are but you have to measure again.

In the below photo we have agreed that the distance from bottom of pocket is more than 1.5 inch. I remind you what you said
Does it look like it lines up? Going from this grid, the pocket is 6.25" wide and 7" high. Looks like I was off my 1/2". Also, it looks like the pocket is a little more than 1.5" from the bottom. The top of the pocket looks like it is an even 9" from the bottom. So what I get is the pocket is 7" high, 2" from the hem to the bottom and 9" from the hem to the top. Also, the grid clearly show the pocket is 2.25" from the edge of the flap.
Image

But in the photo below, you begin measurement by assuming that distance from bottom of pocket to hem is 1.5 inch.

Image

This produces a wrong measurement of the distance between zipper and pocket, therefore giving the impression that pockets are off center.

Please measure again the second photo, assuming that distance from hem is more than 1.5 inch. (Now that I am writing this I see that the top of the pocket is at 9 inches in both pictures, which means that one pocket is bigger than the other. Crazy huh?) One last thought is that if in the first pic we could stretch the jacket so to be even like it was laid on a flat surface, then maybe the bottom of the pocket would reach the 1.5 inch line on your grid, and the hem of the jacket to touch the bottom line of the grid. If that was the case, then measurements of the second photo are correct and therefore pockets are off center.

I think there is some scene in the raven bar where he has the jacket zipped up so maybe there we can see if the pockets are off center.

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 4:34 am
by PLATON
Also, this photo of the pocket can be taken under consideration. It's main characteristic is that storm flap appears to be very wide.

Image

According to my calculactions, if storm flap width is 1.5 inches, then pocket height is 6.70 inches (too small) and disctance of bottom of pocket till hem is 1.2 inches. Distcance of pocket flap seam to hem is 8.26 inches and pocket flap height at center is 2.36 inches.

I don't really think the above is the case, so going the other way around, i.e. assuming that the pocket flap height is 3 inches at its center, then, the pocket height is 8.5 inches and the storm flap width is 2 inches. Also the disctance of pocket bottom to hem is 1.5 inches. In this case distance of top of pocket till hem is 10 inches.

This is more likely, because the numbers are round. But, it does not explain why we see the distance of pocket bottom to hem to be larger than the width of the storm flap in the below photo.

Image

So, one more assumprion is in order, that this is a different jacket than the jacket we see outside the temple. Then again, if you notice the way the pocket flap is curved on its side that is closer to the storm flap, I would say it's the same jacket.....

Another thing you can notice in this photo is the length of the sleeve relative to the length of the jacket.

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 11:50 am
by Puppetboy
Platon,

Where is that picture from? Is that from Raiders??? Yes, it is very instructive. It looks like there's something flat inside the cargo pocket that's holding it nice and straight for us.

Yeah, I think the temple jacket might be lop-sided. One pocket might be taller than the other. It looks like they are placed the same, though. Also, the bottom of the pocket has a slight curve to it. I noticed that on the G&B jacket.
Really, given the fact that NO ONE has examined any of the original HERO jackets and taken precise measurements, I think it's safe to say NOTHING is absolutely clear, once you get into details this specific. Perfect example, the whole "X-box" stitching or no "X-box" stitching debate that has arisen in above posts. Many pics supplied as evidence show what could be an X-box...if you squint your eyes just right. Granted, it may be an X-box, but it's just not clear enough from the available visual evidence at our disposal. Thus, I think if a detail isn't absolutely clear, a best guess is in order.

As for variations between jackets, I'd suggest picking one design and sticking with it. Just like the fedora, you can't have a jacket that looks just like Indy's does in every frame of Raiders, but you can pick a specific style and go with that (like folks do with the hats, picking an SOC version or Raven Bar, etc.) That way, it's still screen-accurate to specific points in the film, rather than being a hybrid of 2 or 3 jackets and not being screen-accurate to ANY one jacket.

And when it comes to practicality vs. screen accuracy, I guess if a certain method of construction is not reliable for a real-world, regular wear jacket, obviously the construction should be changed to allow maximum durability. (while staying as close to the original look as possible) Making a screen-accurate jacket that looks great but falls apart after a month or two is not good for anyone. However, to change things like collar design and pocket placement just because they are irregularities doesn't make sense to me. Now you're getting into the realm of changing a design simply as a matter of personal taste, rather than for functionality or durability. And once you go that road, why bother with such details as x-box or no x-box, pointed storm-flap or rounded...if you're making a jacket the way you want the jacket to be made, rather than making it the way it was, what's the point of obsessing over all these little details if you're just going to throw some of them out?
Amen, GCR! My thoughts exactly. I think we're collecting enough information here to identify the (let's suppose) two main jackets here and determine the specs of each. As for the off-center pockets - remember, they're only off-center when the jacket is zipped. They will look centered when the jacket is left open, which is most of the time. Perhaps that was the reason for constructing it this way in the first place?

Agent5, I know you think there's an X there on the front strap, (and maybe there's a small one), but I have to go with the evidence of the very pronounced stretch marks. They contradict the existence of a stitch line where you say it is. I see the shadows you refer to, but they could be simple ripples in the leather (the jacket is covered with them).

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 11:57 am
by PLATON
Todd,

You read everything I said above?
What's your position regarding the seam of the pocket flap and what are youf final thoughts on pocket size?

Pls let us know.

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:04 pm
by Puppetboy
PLATON,

it depends on if that close-up photo is from Raiders or not. I want to know if we are looking at the same jacket here. If it is possibly the same jacket, then I'll have to re-examine the other pics in light of it.

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:43 pm
by Ark Hunter
PLATON wrote:Image
Yeah, is this from Raiders?

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:45 pm
by PLATON
Yes, it is from Raiders. It's a production photo from filming the temple scene. It shows HF holding the idol. I have the complete photo at home, (still at work). I will post it when I get at home, unless someone else here is faster than me.

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:37 pm
by Puppetboy
Excellent!!! Here is an analysis of the photo:

Image

If we assume that the top of the pocket is 9" from the hem, then we get a 7.5" tall pocket, a 1.5" distance from the hem, a 2.25" distance from the edge of the storm flap, and stitching on the storm flap that is a little wide - about 1/4" off. That would explain why I judged the pocket to be a little shorter than it was - I assumed a 1.5" storm flap. It could simply be that the stitch is crooked.

Anyway, these dimensions match the G&B that I have, so I'd say they're pretty much confirmed in my mind. We've got three photos that agree and a G&B with the exact same dimension.

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:51 pm
by Kt Templar
To be honest with you, I don't think we can assume anything from that particular photo. There is nothing in it that we can measure against and, without evidence to the contrary, we cannot say one way or another that the storm flap is or isn't 1.5".

The one thing I can say is the pocket seems much closer to the flap (inner) edge than is usual. And that this pocket appears to be the taller variety rather than the shorter squarer type.

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:53 pm
by PLATON
Here's the photo

Image

Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:07 pm
by PLATON
To be honest with you, I don't think we can assume anything from that particular photo. There is nothing in it that we can measure against and, without evidence to the contrary, we cannot say one way or another that the storm flap is or isn't 1.5".

The one thing I can say is the pocket seems much closer to the flap (inner) edge than is usual. And that this pocket appears to be the taller variety rather than the shorter squarer type.
That's why the best guess is in order.


I propose to Todd to re-measure the pocket in the below photo basis that the strap is 1 inch (that we know for a fact-can't be otherwise) as opposed to that the storm flap is 1.5 inch

Image


One question: What's the width of the storm flap on the FS?