Club Obi Wan

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:18 am**

RCSignals wrote:
jnicktem wrote:HJ DID at one point make an Australian model:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=45425
the hat in that photo is not 'Australian'

Obviously is not "Australian". I was well aware of that when I posted the thread. It was just a name I used to relate to Nadoolman's famous description of the Indy hat. If she had to describe the look of such a hat it's understandable she would have called it "australian" even if it was completely British.

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:25 am**

HJ 'Austrailian model'..

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:29 am**

I don't think it matters whether or not HJ really made an Australian model. Deborah Landis is not a hat afficionado. What she saw was somehow an "Australian hat" in her mind. How often have we renamed things due to what we think they are? Anyone seen the Little Mermaid? Remember the Dinglehopper? Same thing.

Now, what I see is her taking the Aussie hat and seeing a canvas to work with. That's how costume designers work and think. She saw enough material to give her the hat Spielberg wanted.

Also, I can see one hat being turned by accident by Ford or Spielberg during creasing, but all? This was a decision made by someone, to have the hats turned. Who thinks this way? Costume designers.

Now, maybe Landis didn't have as much to do with the hat as she would like us to believe and her changing stories don't help, but she had a role to play and it is as significant as Swales, Spielberg, and Ford. On top of the fact that this all happened 30 years ago and this was just another film. I can't remember what I had for breakfast much less what I did at work 30 yeas ago...I'm not even 30 yeas old!

And I don't know about you, but everytime I retell a great story, it gets more and more grand. It doesn't mean it didn't happen though...

Dave

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:16 am**

_ wrote: Generally, they're told by somebody who is not proud of what really happened.

Oh, I don't know about that, my friend! I'm proud to be completely responsible for all the incorrect information ever posted regarding the gear all these years!

No, wait, that didn't come out right....

Regards! Michaelson

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:27 am**

_ wrote: Now, did I ever tell y'all about the time I saved an airplane full of people with nothing but my Hovitos thong and a screen-used Gary White LC fedora?

A HUNDRED times...

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:40 am**

Just please don't reenact it anymore.

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:54 am**

I think I just threw up a little bit.

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 12:52 pm**

Much. But I won't be checking this thread when I get home.

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:37 pm**

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:39 pm**

But bringing it back to the hat forum, I introduced a new method to finding out the actual block shape of the Raiders hat. I had seen so many hats over the years from high quality vendors, but it was very rare that they didn't look "off" in some way in regard to the shape. They either looked like a regular "raiders-ish" fedora or like a charicature of it. SO I thought I'd have a go at doing it myself. The technique I devised enabled me to cross-check from half a dozen sources for each angle of the hat, and resulted in accuracy to the millimetre.

Now HOW did I miss that post?? Please point me to it! I want to see what you came up with. Now, my memory is bad, but surely I would have remembered something as big as this. If I posted on that thread, and you showed pics, I am going to see my Doc. to be checked for old timer's disease. I am serious. Fedora

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:42 pm**

Here you go Fedora:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=44705

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:00 pm**

_,

I hear where YJ and others are coming from. Sure, you are doing this research for yourself and you don't have to prove anything to anybody. You're not obligated to gain the trust of the skeptics. But I see the issue a little differently. If I may be so bold, I would like to advance the following for your consideration:

Although your quest is a personal one, you are sharing it publicly. By doing so, you bear a bit of responsibility. Your word will become gospel for future fans. Intentionally or unintentionally, you are rewriting the publically known history of these events. But this changes with each new piece of information you discover.

I completely appreciate your transparency in that regard. We have the words of Peter Boatwright on record. He was there, he was dealing with Berman & Nathans, and he's probably had many conversations since with other first-hand parties. We have the words of Deborah Nadoolman/Landis on record. But the testimony of the others - SS, GL, IH, KK, NH, MB, TL, and a host of other initials, is not documented in any way. We are left with only the great repository of knowledge in your size 8 cranium.

If you are going to make this information (or your interpretation/recollection of it) public, it only seems right that you make a more lasting contribution. These interviews you've had need to be preserved "on the record" so that future generations won't have to rely on hearsay (no offense, but technically that is what we have). I don't care who does it or how, but the words of these people need to be preserved.

Send Sergeant Friday with his tape recorder.

Meanwhile, why not document your own experience? I would love to see what the "blue book" looks like. I've never seen one, and this is an important "artifact". Take photos of yourself with the people you talk to. It's your experience and your story, which is interesting in itself.

I know how much you care about "setting the record straight" and how much you care about the COW community. If you didn't, you wouldn't spend so much time here. If you want this information to outlast you, it should be entrusted to the community. Just my 2 cents.

BTW, when will you release some of the blue book documents? SS said it was okay, right?

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:21 pm**

Some of us have been privy to see the "blue book". Its neither blue nor a book, so let the conspiracy theorists have their day with that one.

As far as documenting his interviews, that is happening in the write-ups on the main site.

…and Hi Kelly, "Michael".

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 3:42 pm**

Todd, (not me)

I apologize if I wasn't clear. It was a LONG post!

Code: Select all

It really comes down to this. What's in it for me? Tell me why I should put in more effort than I already have.

You tell me. Why ARE you doing this? Why ARE you putting this much effort into this? You must get something out of it or you wouldn't do it. Am I right?

That's kinda why I wrote the jacket sections the way I did - with references and credits to those I talked to.

What you've done is fantastic, please don't infer any criticism whatsoever in my comments! I'm behind you 100%! I would never diminish the value of your interviews, etc. in any way. They hold total weight with me. But what about the future? My point is only this: How can we preserve what you've done in a way that will be authoritative long after _ or COW have disappeared?

Maybe I'm the only one who cares. I don't know. Does any of this make sense?

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 3:44 pm**

LOL! Pretty sure I made this clear at the time I posted that. It was a dare. No, it was a threat. "Sure, go ahead." Like when one's wife says "Sure, go ahead" when the guys call and say they are going on a strip-club crawl in Vegas...

Yeah, you said that. I didn't get it. Sometimes I'm a little slow...

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 3:59 pm**

Take most of this tongue in cheek as I've not slept much during a horrible week so I'm a bit slap-happy.

It really comes down to this. What's in it for me? Tell me why I should put in more effort than I already have. If somebody can explain to me what I get for putting in more work and disclosing more than I already choose to, I'd be glad to listen...

Because you like the attention?

Seriously though, as Puppetboy asked, why have you done as much as you've done? My understanding was it came from personal curiosity and you thought it would be good to share your findings with others. No better reasons than that. But if I had put all of the effort into this as you've invested, why would you not want it saved for posterity? Why wouldn't you want to preserve your research for others?

And maybe I'm exaggerating too much. Maybe no one will want to know any of this stuff in a few years, but who would have predicted COW in '81 when Raiders came out.

And, again, while I understand that you've got other things to consider when it comes to disclosure, I would want to have as much documentation as I could so people could see what I was saying was factual. Maybe it's just me, but I would want to put out as much as I could. I'm sort of a "don't take my word for it, here's the proof type of guy".

Todd (the other Todd) put it much better than my sleep-deprived brain can do right now:

"They hold total weight with me. But what about the future? My point is only this: How can we preserve what you've done in a way that will be authoritative long after _ or COW have disappeared?"

Plus, think of the bonus, you would shut up all of us Kool-Aid swilling, ankle biters!

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 4:36 pm**

mark seven wrote:HJ 'Austrailian model'..

That is what I was thinking of in my previous post. Far more believable that is the 'Australian' style DN referred to.

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 6:10 pm**

_ wrote:As I've relayed I have had more indepth conversations with both George and Steven about this stuff, and George has asked if I'd consider placing/donating the work to the archives. I've agreed. He's said again and again that he wishes he had a team of archivists to do what we do. His concern is that it is all in his head.

I think the archives is the proper place.

Ill fly out and help. no problem

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:03 pm**

_ wrote:Like when one's wife says "Sure, go ahead" when the guys call and say they are going on a strip-club crawl in Vegas...

Kind of like when I had made plans to attend the C3 Star Wars Celebration and we learned that my daughter was due the week after. My wife said "I would like it if you could go." I took that as a pass and didn't cancel the hotel reservations, until I casually mentioned trip plans months later. Boy did it ever hit the fan and the one time she made my "acts like a twelve year old" rep she gave me sound degrading. Took a while to live that one down.

Good news is when C4 came around, I was given a pass and her blessing to go.

Posted: **Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:56 pm**

Of course, it would be nice if they would just actually say what they were really thinking...

Can't expect everything I guess.

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 11:31 am**

_
Maybe I am missing something here but I think rather than question why you are doing it people would just be thankful that you do. Seriously. As I previously stated this has been a great thread with all kinds of insteresting information. I am sure I read that you were looking in to this more because people asked you about info on the hat and I think you have gone more than the extra mile to provide more information. What people choose to do with it is there business. If they choose not to believe or disagree that is part of what goes on here but to give you a hard time about it or to demand more makes no sense to me.

Personally, and I am sure I am not alone when I say thanks so much for your efforts on this one.
JMO
Canada

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 11:37 am**

I leave for a week and you guys have doubled the length of this thread! Yowza!

Let me echo what CJ has said and add my thanks to the list. And yes, folks, the "blue book" does exist, though it's more of a blue accordion folder...

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 11:44 am**

binkmeisterRick wrote:And yes, folks, the "blue book" does exist, though it's more of a blue accordion folder...

And it plays a mean polka!

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 11:46 am**

MIKE! You weren't supposed to post pictures!!!

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 12:08 pm**

I don't see why people are so uptight about dates. I mean, they're right there on the tabs!

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:02 pm**

Seriously. As I previously stated this has been a great thread with all kinds of insteresting information. I am sure I read that you were looking in to this more because people asked you about info on the hat and I think you have gone more than the extra mile to provide more information. What people choose to do with it is there business. If they choose not to believe or disagree that is part of what goes on here but to give you a hard time about it or to demand more makes no sense to me.

Personally, and I am sure I am not alone when I say thanks so much for your efforts on this one.
JMO

And double ditto for myself. These new revelations just turned upside down many theories here, regarding the birth of that hat. _'s scenerio is much simpler. We may never know for sure, D.N.s exact involvment, but I think we can toss the bespoke hat out the door.

Weird about that fawn color though. I just can't see the Raiders fedora being fawn, unless the fawn from that supplier in that era was a darker fawn than what I am used to seeing. Which of course, could be the case. Or was the case, yet we still have documented info from _ saying the hats were sable. A error on their part? Perhaps. Fedora

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:27 pm**

ersonally? I can see the hat darkening with grim, sweat, and dirt. I look at this supposed "Grail" fedora from raiders that's been found and it looks lighter than any sable I've seen. But that's jmo...

Well, you know at the start of the film, when Indy is headed to the river, he walks into bright sunlight. That hat under sunlight looked really light in color. And that color we see there is indeed closer to a fawn color than the sable.

Plus, when the hats were being aged for Harrison, they couild have used a red fullers earth instead of the natural color used in Indy 4. I always felt the Raiders hat was a different color from the other two films, and this verifies that feeling.

The question is, what undertone is generally used in the fawn color? I have no clue. But I do know the fawn color can vary significantly from factory to factory. And there are probably at least a half dozen fawn colors, if not more. Fedora

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:52 pm**

Fawn is indeed a very generic name, almost as generic as saying "brown". Each hat company offers a different fawn. For all we know the 80's HJ fawn could have been identical to what Christy's carries as "light sable".

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:07 pm**

Are you sure this wasn't the fawn hat he ordered?

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:17 pm**

what did they use to cover the spots?

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:17 pm**

That's the distressing.

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:31 pm**

_, part of me thinks:
That slap emoticon can't get here fast enough!

Of course, the other part of me thinks that the arrival & availablility of such a thing would turn these forums into an all-out, non-stop Slap-Fest of apocalyptic proportions - the likes of which even the most ornery - and drunken - of Stooges have ever bore witness to...

Yup.
That's what I'm thinkin...

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 4:18 pm**

Maybe I am missing something here but I think rather than question why you are doing it people would just be thankful that you do. Seriously. As I previously stated this has been a great thread with all kinds of insteresting information. I am sure I read that you were looking in to this more because people asked you about info on the hat and I think you have gone more than the extra mile to provide more information. What people choose to do with it is there business. If they choose not to believe or disagree that is part of what goes on here but to give you a hard time about it or to demand more makes no sense to me.

I think you are missing something with my point (and Puppetboy as well, if I'm reading him correctly). I don't think anyone is questioning _'s reasons for researching this stuff or trying to give him a hard time about it or demand even more from him (I'm certainly not). What I'm saying is that his work should be preserved for posterity. We don't know if the interest that we have for Indy and his gear will dry up in future generations or continue. If it continues, then _'s work will continue to be important to the hobby. Things that he knows that haven't been documented would disappear with him (and I'm not talking about things that are covered by NDAs and the like. Those are a whole other category than what I'm discussing here). Future fans won't have the benefit of his reputation in determining the "solidness" of his findings.

So it isn't questioning _ for ulterior motives or demand he does even more. It's wanting to preserve the work he's done. If he doesn't want to put the energy to do that, it's his research and his choice. But I, for one, would hate to see the work disappear.

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 4:49 pm**

Another reason for re-boot. You get younger generations interested.

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 4:57 pm**

To reiterate what _ wrote above:

.... I have had more indepth conversations with both George and Steven about this stuff, and George has asked if I'd consider placing/donating the work to the archives. I've agreed.

So, nothing will be lost.

Regards! Michaelson

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 7:07 pm**

_ wrote:How do you ask somebody to document everything they know?

Well, for some of us here it would fit on a Post-it Note.

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 7:08 pm**

That would be me! $\:D/$

No....wait....

Regards! Michaelson

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 7:11 pm**

How do you ask somebody to document everything they know?

"Hey _, why don't you document everything you know?"

See? It's easy.

To reiterate what _ wrote above:

Quote:
.... I have had more indepth conversations with both George and Steven about this stuff, and George has asked if I'd consider placing/donating the work to the archives. I've agreed.

So, nothing will be lost.

Regards! Michaelson

So noted and I think that is a very good idea. But what of that material would be available to us here? I'm sure some of it would be covered by NDAs and, thus, wouldn't be for mass consumption, but what of the stuff that isn't covered by NDAs? If it goes into the archives, will we be able to get our geek on for it?

Most probably, all of this is a moot point, and I'm just hunting snipes. I'm sure the jacket write-ups will reflect the new info that's coming out with Cooper's involvement, which jackets were used, etc., once things have become more clear as time goes on. I'm not sure of who handles the fedora write-ups but, again, once everything has been pretty firmly nailed down, hopefully, the Raiders fedora write-up will be changed to reflect the new info coming out in this thread.

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 7:23 pm**

crismans, all this information belongs to LFL anyway.

The question was posed, what would happen if _ and COW just disappeared? Where would the information go? It would be at LFL in an official capacity.

Until the day COW ever 'disappears', it will remain right here for all to read.

We're all here by the good graces of Mr. George Lucas. Until that day ever comes that he decides to pull the plug on fan sites, it's out here for all to read and absorb/debate, as usual.

Apparently he's finally recognized that it IS important information, and he's asked a COW member to assemble the information for the archives. We should be happy he's finally opened up to that thought process.

Indy has been the proverbial redheaded step child when compared to the SW franchise. This request actually gives the hobby/franchise the respect it deserves. We should be pleased this request has been posed and accepted rather than worry about it all disappearing into the dark abyss of Skywalker Ranch. It's not our call anyway.

Regards !Michaelson

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 7:54 pm**

As far as the raiders hats being "fawn" I think that it would be wise to keep in mind that as far as naming colors go (dyes, paints, inks etc.) words only go so far and someone at HJ in 1980 might have decided that they were going to call a darker brown hue fawn regardless of what the conventional wisdom was. The color mauve is a good example, find early examples of mauve compared to what contemporary color knowledge would say mauve is and you'll see a world of difference.

The mentioning of fawn reminds me of the hat Tom Selleck wears in a raiders screen test we have all seen, or I could be misremembering?

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 8:05 pm**

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 8:34 pm**

It arms the customer with information they can use to get what they want. Thats the goal. That's why I do it.

I never doubted that your motives were less than virtuous - but you raised the question yourself "What do I get out of it?"

_, what you've done is way more just than figuring out what color the jacket pocket snaps were. You've illuminated the whole series of events and people that contributed to the origins of the Indiana Jones costume, and written a whole new "history". Wouldn't you be a "doubting Thomas" too? Isn't that what started you down this road in the first place? That's why I care about it's permanence.

I'm glad that your material will be in the Archives, (will you have an easier time getting in next time?) but I'm glad to hear that you won't lose possession of your research! Oh, and thanks for the pic of the file! Cool, cool, cool! That needs to be on the main site! It might just look like a pile of papers to you, but it's a thrill for me!

Okay, here's an idea on the "gray matter" problem: kryogenics.

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:03 pm**

crismans, all this information belongs to LFL anyway.

The information was out there for the asking - the collective memories of those involved first-hand. I hope GL can't claim those as his property. Yikes! The paperwork - sure - those are his and Paramount's (they paid for it, afterall). But most of _'s information came straight from the people themselves.

Western Costumes' records for all of their films ("Raiders" included) have been in available to the public for years - first in their own research library, and then when they ran out of room, parted out to Motion Picture Academy's library, UCLA film school library, and USC film school library. Most of it was lost. At some point GL began retrieving what was left. If you were researching "Dumb and Dumber", head to one of those libraries and make photocopies to your heart's content. It's old information of no use to the studio. "Here you go - photocopy away! Knock yourself out! You want to know how many shirts Jeff Daniels wore? Here ya go!" It's just because it's "Indiana Jones" that it's somehow secret stuff. Maybe because so many people want to take credit for more than their share, maybe because of it's age and the fact that remaining paperwork is scarce... who knows?

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:51 pm**

Well then, I stand corrected.

My point was that Lucas has never attempted to round up ANY information what so ever regarding this franchise on his own, at least that I'M aware of.

I'm just pleased he finally decided to ask someone who knew what has gone on all these years, and is willing to take on the task and will archive the wheat instead of all the chaff that's been flying for decades.

I will bow out of the discussion now.

Regard! Michaelson

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:53 pm**

Okay, I realize that I'm probably the guy that's painting himself into a corner so I'll try my best to drop it after this.

crismans, all this information belongs to LFL anyway.

Respectfully, no it doesn't. Not all of it anyway. I think Todd (Coyle) said it best. Paperwork, licenses, copywritten material, etc.? They are Lucas' and Paramount's. Like Todd, said they paid for it. But the memories of those involved in the projects, what they did for the movie, if that isn't covered by an NDA somewhere, that's public knowledge. LFL doesn't own people's memories.

We owe a great deal to Mr. Lucas, both creatively and with his generosity to play in his sandbox so to speak. But let's not get carried away here.

I'm just pleased he finally decided to ask someone who knew what has gone on all these years, and is willing to take on the task and will archive the wheat instead of all the chaff that's been flying for decades.

With this, I'm in whole-hearted agreement!

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:57 pm**

I don't agree, but that's my perogative. A LOT has been said and done over the years with no challenge from LFL, but when CS came out, his lawyers put the fear of GOD in vendors who had been doing anything they wanted with his franchise.

Lucas has never really exercised his rights with Indy, not like SW, and I bet there are more NDA's that have been violated over this franchise than you could shake a stick at.

I've said all I have to say about it. Carry on.

Regards! Michaelson

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 10:13 pm**

A LOT has been said and done over the years with no challenge from LFL, but when CS came out, his lawyers put the fear of GOD in vendors who had been doing anything they wanted with his franchise.

I wasn't referring to vendors. That is an area in which LFL has total sway, I'm sure.

I don't agree, but that's my perogative.

We'll shelve it on the "disagree" shelf and move on. Plenty of other stuff we do agree on.

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 10:41 pm**

Michaelson, you're right about CS - I don't know if _ has run into this - but I've heard from more than one source that the wardrobe drama and the extreme security has made those associated very tight-lipped. Now you mention "Indiana Jones" and people clam up.

As far as NDAs from "Raiders", _, has anyone you've spoken with mentioned being restricted by one? What was standard back in the day?

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:19 am**

Yojimbo Jones wrote:

....................."we have top men working on it"

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 3:40 am**

Michaelson wrote:Lucas has never really exercised his rights with Indy, not like SW, and I bet there are more NDA's that have been violated over this franchise than you could shake a stick at.

Could it be because it's a bit harder to identify sellers of Indy stuff? I mean, if you were a vendor making stormtrooper armours you surely have no excuse but if you are a jacket maker and make a jacket that resemble the Indy one (even at the level of being spot on) you can still claim it's a coincidence.
Same with the trousers, same with the shirt. Belts, holsters and gasmask bags are surprlus stuff, nothing that Georgy-boy could ever claim as "his". Even the hat was a normal hat bought in a shop with no legal rights over it whatsoever.

On props I could agree but with the Indy gear I don't think he could do much about as long as they are not labelled "Indiana Jones".

As long as sellers don't call it "Indiana Jones jacket" or "Indiana Jones shirt" I have my doubts that Lucas Films Ltd. could have anything to say on someone selling brown felt hats with straight sides and surely cannot shut down Aldens or David Morgan because they sell what was used for the Indy costume... while, as I said, it's a bit harder to pass a stormtrooper costume (or lightsabers) as a strikingly coincidence of a generic "space costume".
And by the way, I've heard that the guy who made these costumes in Britain has fought and won his legal battle against Lucas... so he can now continue selling his Stormtrooper armours (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u ... 958998.ece). So saying that Peter owns nothing if the design was really his... is not entirely true I think.

Club Obi Wan

The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...

Re: The Raider Fedora from a Jacket Guy...